Floor Statements

Mr. President, we are getting ready to vote on my CRA, S.J. Res. 80. And, by the away, I appreciated the strong bipartisan vote yesterday to get on this bill.

This is a really important resolution for our country, for my State, for the Native people, and the workers of America.

So I am asking my Democrat colleagues to really think hard about this. I see the Schumer-Heinrich ``Vote no on the Sullivan CRA'' down there, but I want to make a plea to my Democrat colleagues. You should vote yes on this S.J. Res--you had one courageous one yesterday, Senator Fetterman--and here is why: A vote yes on this resolution is a vote to unleash American energy.

As I talked about yesterday, the best way to undermine Vladimir Putin and his corrupt regime in Russia is to produce more American energy in the place with the highest standards in the world. That happens to be my State. That happens to be the National Petroleum Reserve of Alaska, which is all about what this CRA is about.

Second, this is really important. My colleagues over there love to say: Hey, we are the party of the working families, of working Americans. No, you are not. A vote yes on this resolution is a pro- union, pro-worker vote. The laborers, operating engineers--they all want a yes on this. They all produce oil up here.

This is a chance. My colleagues, for too long on the other side of the aisle, kowtow to the far-left environmental groups at the expense of working Americans. That is why you are no longer the party of working Americans. This is a chance. Maybe you won't kowtow to the far left.

A ``yes'' vote on this S. Res. will also vindicate the rule of law.

What am I talking about? This is the National Petroleum Reserve of Alaska. The Congress of the United States--us--in a law said that we are going to develop this part of my State for oil and gas production. And Joe Biden came in with a regulation saying: Nope, we are going to shut that down, violating the rule of law.

If my colleagues on the other side of the aisle really want to promote the rule of law, they should vote yes.

And, finally, as I mentioned yesterday, this is a vote for the interests of the Native people of my State. As I said yesterday--here is a letter I submitted for the Record. The Tribe in this area, the borough, which is all run by Alaska Natives, elected officials; the Alaska Native Corporation, all the leaders in this part of my State-- which is what this resolution is all about--all of them, all the indigenous people, the leaders of this part of my State want this resolution.

They didn't want the Biden lockup. They came down to Washington, DC, eight different times to just request a meeting with the Secretary of the Interior, saying: Don't lock up our lands. This will hurt our future. This will hurt our life expectancy. This will hurt our jobs.

And the Secretary of the Interior never even met with them, neither did the President--eight times.

So this is a strong vote for the interests of the indigenous people of my State.

I will conclude with this: My Democratic friends often bristle when accused of selling out the interest of working Americans--the men and women who build stuff, the unions that build stuff, the building trades, the men and women who drill for oil and gas and mines and rare earths and critical minerals. Well, here is an opportunity for them to say: No, we are going to stand with the people who build this great Nation.

My friends on the other side of the aisle often talk about: Hey, we are going to support indigenous people, people of color. Well, here is an opportunity to do it.

But what I fear, what has happened way too much in this body, these interests--working Americans, building trades, the unions, the Native people of my State--they always get sold out to what? The far left, coastal elites, the radical neocolonialists. That is why Heinrich and Schumer are down there saying: Vote no on the Sullivan resolution.

But I know some of my colleagues know that a ``yes'' vote is the right thing to do. It is the right thing to do for our energy dominance. It is the right thing to do for our foreign policy. It is the right thing to do for working Americans who have fled the Democratic Party over issues like this. And it is the right thing to do for the indigenous people of my State.

I hope I get a couple more Democrat Senators who cross the aisle. Don't listen to your leader. Don't listen to Senator Heinrich, for God's sake, on this issue. Vote yes on this important resolution for America and for working families and the Native people of Alaska.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to speak for up to 15 minutes prior to the scheduled rollcall vote.

Mr. President, I rise to urge my colleagues to overturn the Biden administration's sweeping restrictions of what we call in Alaska the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska--so to pass the CRA, the S.J. Res. 80, that we are going to vote on here in a couple of minutes.

When I say the Biden administration's restrictions, in this case, that is not strong enough. What the Biden administration did when they came into office is they took the NPRA--that is right there, the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska--and they said we are going to essentially shut this down.

So what is the National Petroleum Reserve of Alaska? Well, it started out--in 1923, President Warren Harding said: This is so important, this area of Alaska, we are going to call it the Naval Petroleum Reserve of Alaska for the U.S. Navy for oil.

Then Congress later came and in law said: No, we are going to designate this the ``National Petroleum Reserve of Alaska.'' It is the size of Indiana, and we are going to make sure it is developed for oil.

Development--that is what this body did.

Joe Biden comes in and says: Nope. We are going to take an Executive order, and we are going to shut it down.

And that is what they did.

So the most important element of this is not just Biden flaunting the law, which he did in Alaska many times, as I am going to get to--he canceled the voices of the most important people in Alaska who lived there.

So let me go to the next slide here. A lot of people have seen this. This is what I call the Last Frontier Lock-Up. OK. This is a map of Alaska. Here is NPR-A up here. Again, we are a big State. That is about the size of Indiana.

Biden issued 70 Executive orders and Executive actions singularly focused on my State during his 4 years--7-0. One of them is the lockup of NPR-A, on this huge list.

By the way, I went to the President, President Biden, when this list was at 48, and I handed it to him and said: Mr. President, what are you doing? Do you even know what you are doing?

John Podesta was in there--all the bad, you know, far-left, radical enviros.

You are crushing our State, you are crushing American energy, you are killing workers, and you are not listening to the Native people of my State who don't like this. And by the way, Mr. President, we have the highest standards in the world on resource development in Alaska.

But they didn't listen. So 7-0 Executive orders singularly focused on one State. It was an outrage. But it showed their priorities, which was not to unleash American energy but to listen to the radical far left, who always wants to shut down Alaska. They don't care about the Native people; don't care about jobs; certainly don't care about union jobs.

So the good news is that when President Trump came into office, he said: Enough of that. We are going to unleash Alaska.

So day one--this is a day-one Executive order from the President of the United States. He said: We are going to unleash Alaska's extraordinary resource potential.

That is a day-one Executive order from President Trump, and so that is what we are doing. We are going to do it through the executive branch--what the President is doing--and here in the legislative branch. So, not surprisingly, this morning, there was a Statement of Administration Policy from the Trump administration saying they ``strongly supports passage of S.J. Res. 80`` of my CRA.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the October 29, 2025, Statement of Administration Policy be printed in the Record.

So why would we want to do this? Again, we have the highest environmental standards in the world, but when you unleash Alaska energy, when you unleash Montana energy, when you unleash American energy, it helps with jobs, it helps with our environment because we have the highest standards in the world, and it really helps with national security.

I remember a meeting I was in many years ago with Senator McCain, John McCain, and a very prominent Russian dissident, Vladimir Kara- Murza. Putin has tried to poison and kill this guy twice. He is still alive. He lives in America now. He is a great hero.

At the end of the meeting, I looked at Vladimir Kara-Murza: What more can we do to undermine the Putin regime?

Do you know what he said? He said: Simple, Senator. The No. 1 thing America can do to undermine Vladimir Putin is produce more American energy.

By the way, all of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who love shutting down energy production, you are only helping our adversaries--Venezuela, China, Russia.

So this is about national security and environmental stewardship.

Really important--I want to talk about another group that matters a lot with regard to this CRA, and this is the Native people who live on the North Slope of Alaska.

This is a slide that I put out a lot. This is where we are looking at. This is the National Petroleum Reserve of Alaska in my State.

This is what we call our trilateral in Alaska: the Inupiat Community of the Arctic Slope--that is the Tribe; the North Slope Borough, which is our government entity, which is huge--the North Slope Borough I think is almost the size of Montana; and the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation, which is our regional Native corporation.

They tried. Eight times they flew to Washington, DC. This is all Native people. They flew to Washington, DC, during the Biden administration. Eight times they flew down here--4,000 miles away from their home--to try to meet with the Secretary of the Interior, Secretary Haaland, and the White House of the Biden administration, saying: Don't do this NPR-A lockup. This is our land. Don't do it.

Do you know what? The Biden administration never even met with them. The Secretary of the Interior never met with them. They flew here eight different times to say: Don't do it. This is every Tribal leader, Native leader, on the North Slope, and their voices were ignored. Think about that. Eight times.

Now, the total insult when Biden finally did this giant regulation locking up the entire National Petroleum Reserve of Alaska--do you know what he did? He and Secretary Haaland put out a statement saying: We did this because the Native people of Alaska wanted it.

I went on national TV. I don't normally throw bombs, but I went on national TV, and I said: That is a bald-faced lie from Joe Biden.

He was canceling Native voices, and then he was using them. He literally said: We did this because the Native people of Alaska wanted it.

Outrageous--actually, one of the most outrageous things I saw the Biden administration do, and they did a heck of a lot of outrageous stuff.

So I want to submit for the Record a letter from ICAS, the North Slope Borough, and ASRC--the trilateral, as we call it--all the Native leadership on the North Slope strongly supporting my CRA.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the October 3, 2025, Inupiat Community of the Arctic Slope letter be printed in the Record.

I would also like to submit for the Record a letter from The Alliance, which is all of our companies--not just energy companies but all related companies, the biggest group of businesses, workers in Alaska, who also strongly support my CRA.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that The Alliance letter of October 18, 2025, be printed in the Record.

Let me just end with this: I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle can vote for this CRA.

I talk about jobs, I talk about national security, and I talk about working families, all of which are very important. At the end of the day, this is so important because this actually, in my State, is a matter of life and death.

What do I mean? Now, I have trotted out this chart a lot. I am going to explain it here. But this is why I get so riled up about these issues and why, when my colleagues on the other side of the aisle and Democratic administrations always come up to Alaska, saying ``Hey, we are just going to shut you down; we are going to crush your jobs,'' why I get so animated about it. It is jobs. It is national security. When you are producing energy from America, from Alaska, you are strengthening the country, strengthening good jobs--good union jobs, by the way--but the other thing you are doing is you are helping people live longer.

What do I mean? I break this chart out a lot because it is really important to me. This is from the American Medical Association from 1980 to 2014 on Americans' life expectancy--who was living longer and who, unfortunately, was living less longer.

If you look here, this is America. The light blue, the darker blue, purple--those are the States that are living the longest. The yellow, orange, and red--that is actually people losing life expectancy. That is not good at all.

The place that had the longest life expectancy increase from 1980 to 2014 was my State. Thirteen years. Look at this. Thirteen years on the North Slope, Northwest Arctic Borough, Aleutian Islands chain. How did that happen? It happened because responsible resource development happened.

The Native people of my State were living 13 years longer--more than any other place in the country. I have asked my colleagues a lot when we debate this: Give me a policy indicator of success more important than the people you are representing living longer. There isn't one. I have never heard of one.

The people I am representing are living longer because we are responsibly developing resources. And they get jobs, they get gymnasiums, they get hospitals, and they get flush toilets and running water, which a lot of the communities in my State, Native communities, don't have.

So this is a matter of life and death, my colleagues, and I do want to really try to encourage my colleagues on the other side of the aisle: Join us. This is the right call. There is a lot of talk about. Hey, we want to help minority communities. We want to help people of color. Here is your chance. You are going to help them live longer.

So I am hoping that every Member of this body can come down and vote for my CRA because it is the right thing to do. It is going to help with jobs, it is going to help with national security, and it is what the Native people in my State who actually live there want.

Again, they came down here eight different times and told President Biden and Secretary Haaland: Don't do this. Don't do this.

Not only did they ignore their voice, they wouldn't even meet with them.

So now we have a chance to right that wrong and pass my CRA. Again, I really hope my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will do this because it is the right thing to do, and the indigenous people of my State who live here want this because it is going to help them live longer. I don't think there is anything more important than that.

Motion to Proceed

Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 221, S.J. Res. 80.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up to 15 minutes prior to the scheduled rollcall vote.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to waive the mandatory quorum calls with respect to cloture on the motions to proceed to Calendar No. 167, S. 2882, and Calendar No. 168, H.R. 5371.

Mr. President, I want to thank my colleague Senator Murkowski for her remarks on the vote that we are getting ready to take on the CRA that deals with the Central Yukon plan.

I am going to be a little bit more brief since she covered a lot of material and did a great job of doing it, but I want to give my colleagues just a little sense of the elements of why this plan-- ``plan''--needs to be repealed by the U.S. Senate as part of a CRA.

By the way, Mr. President, this is going to continue in the vein of what we did with your great State of Montana and North Dakota the last 2 days on the Senate floor with these CRAs.

What is going on here? We all know what is going on here both with regard to Montana and with regard to North Dakota and, of course, with regard to Alaska. The previous administration came in and said: Even though it is probably illegal, we are going to try to lock up these States because we don't want resource development in these States.

Imagine, Mr. President, as Senator Murkowski mentioned, the Central Yukon plan that the Biden administration issued--we didn't want it. Nobody really wanted it in Alaska. It is almost 56 million acres. That is the size of Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania combined, just that one plan. It gives you a sense of how big my State is. But can you imagine a President of the United States, if you are a Republican, telling the people of Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania that they are going to be saddled with a plan they didn't want to large swaths of their land, destroying thousands of jobs, which is what this plan would do? Nobody would accept that.

This planned scheme of the Biden administration disregards local voices, ignores protections guaranteed under Federal law--ANCSA and ANILCA--and undermines the ability of Alaska Native corporations, which did not want it, to access and responsibly develop their lands, which Congress gave them in the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act in 1971.

These are the key elements of why it is a problem. It is also part of a long pattern with the Biden administration that I never tire of reminding people.

This is the chart we call the last frontier lockup. The last administration issued 70 Executive orders and Executive actions singularly focused on Alaska--7-0. I confronted President Biden in the Oval Office respectfully when we were at 48. Here is the list of them, by the way, of the 70. That is each one, 7-0--only against Alaska.

I said: Mr. President, why are you doing this? Why are you going to war with my people--working families, Americans? You are sanctioning Alaska more than you sanctioned Iran and Venezuela, and they are terrorist regimes.

He didn't know. I don't think he knew what was going on. But it was wrong.

This, by the way, this Central Yukon management plan, was one of the 70 that we didn't want; that the vast majority of the Native people didn't want; certainly that the Native corporation Doyon--most of their land--they didn't want it.

What we need to do instead, as opposed to locking up Alaska--I said to President Biden: It is not good for Alaska, sir, but it is also not good for America--is we need to do this: unleash Alaska's extraordinary resource potential.

By the way, thank you, President Trump.

This is a day-one Executive order, one of the first Executive orders President Trump issued when he came into office in January and said: We are not going to lock up Alaska; we are going to unleash it.

In his Executive order, we also have essentially getting rid of this Central Yukon management plan from the Biden administration.

So thank you, Mr. President.

Now, my colleagues--I am asking all of them, and I am particularly asking my Democratic colleagues, because I want you guys to show that you are not so anti-Alaska.

The Democratic Party at the national level has become the anti-Alaska party, and that is the anti-Alaska Native party. So many things that we care about in my State in the interest of the Native people--all of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle make it a point--a point--to try to crush us in our opportunity and cancel Native voices--yes, indigenous voices. They are always working to cancel them.

Here is your opportunity, Democrat colleagues, to vote yes on this CRA. Listen to me and Senator Murkowski, the people who represent the people in the great State of Alaska. Listen to President Trump. That is what we want.

I am going to mention just one final thing on why this is so important, why I get really animated about this with all of my colleagues.

A lot of people have seen this chart, but I like showing it because it is a really important issue. This is a chart from the American Medical Association from 1980 to 2014. It has life expectancy in America. The places that are blue, darker blue, and purple, if you look at the chart, these people are living longer. Purple is 13 years. So in 24 years, in certain parts of America, the life expectancy of Americans increased by 13 years.

Unfortunately, in our great Nation--look at the yellow, orange, and red on this chart. That is actually life expectancy decreasing. Of course, nobody wants that. A lot of that was the opioid epidemic and things.

But guess which State had the greatest increase in life expectancy of anyplace in America from 1980 to 2014 according to the American Medical Association. Alaska--especially the North Slope region, interior Alaska, the Aleutian Island area, southeast Alaska.

So what happened from 1980 to 2014 in that part of Alaska? I will tell you what happened. Responsible resource development happened, and people started living longer. They got jobs. They got water and sewer, flushed toilets, gymnasiums, health clinics--things that the lower 48 just takes for granted that we didn't have in a lot of our State. Because we had responsible resource development--mining oil and gas on the North Slope, fishing out on the Aleutian Island chains--all because of laws we made here in Congress, the people of Alaska, particularly the Native people, started living longer--living longer.

I have asked my colleagues--and I have used this chart a lot--to give me an indicator of policy success more important than the people you represent living longer. There isn't one. That is the most important. The people you represent are living longer. Why? Because of responsible resource development. There is no doubt. Here is the chart. Alaskans are living up to 13 years longer.

Now, Native people in my State, unfortunately, started at a really low level--some of the lowest levels of life expectancy--but because we are developing our resources responsibly, my constituents are living longer.

So when you have these groups and you have the Biden administration and, no offense, you have a lot of my Senate Democratic colleagues trying to shut down my State, which they always do, do you know what you are doing? You are actually impacting people's lives and how long they live.

This is really important for me and the people I represent. This is a good opportunity to tell the Biden administration: Hey, you are not going to do this. You are not going to do it to Montana, you are not going to do it to North Dakota, and you certainly are not going to do it to Alaska because you are going to negatively impact people's lives.

I really hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle and I really hope at least one or two Democrats have the courage to come and say: Do you know what, Dan, you have been talking about this for 10 years. I agree with you. I am going to vote to rescind this Biden CRA or this Biden Yukon management plan that nobody wanted, to help your State and help America.

One more thing. In this part of the State where that Central Yukon management plan is--like I said, 56 million

acres--51 of the 56 critical minerals that our country needs are in this area.

I was in an Armed Services hearing recently, and everybody, including a lot of my Democrat colleagues, said: Gosh, we are so reliant on China for critical minerals. What can we do?

I can tell you what you can do: Quit shutting down my State. Let us develop critical minerals in Alaska as opposed to relying on them from China.

That is another reason this is important--for the national security of our country.

With that, I ask all of my colleagues to support this CRA.

I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I move to proceed to H.J. Res. 106.

Vote on Motion

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I rise today to urge my colleagues to overturn the Biden administration's restrictive Central Yukon land management scheme, which threatens Alaska's self-determination and resource development. I ask my colleagues to support our resolution of disapproval, H.J. Res. 106, to protect Alaska's rights and future.

The implementation of the Biden administration's Record of Decision and Approved Central Yukon Resource Management Plan, RMP, prohibits the development of natural resources and essential infrastructure in a broad and sweeping manner--completely undermining multiple-use management while ignoring the needs and input of local residents. We need to ensure that our conservation policies consider and allow for adequate economic opportunities for the communities and people impacted by those policies.

Alaskans are some of the foremost conservationists in the world, with a long-standing record of balancing conservation with responsible resource and infrastructure development. On top of the jobs provided to Alaskan residents, responsible resource development funds various initiatives across the State, including education, infrastructure, and community services. It feeds our families, sustains our communities, and provides livelihoods for the thousands of Alaskans who work to responsibly develop the vast timber, mineral, material, and oil and gas resources that Alaska is blessed with.

In the heart of my State is the Central Yukon planning area, which comprises 56 million acres in central and northern Alaska, an area roughly equivalent to the entirety of Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania combined. The Bureau of Land Management--BLM--manages nearly a quarter--13.3 million acres of that area. The other major landholders within the area include the State of Alaska with 25.4 million acres, approximately 45 percent of the planning area, and Doyon, Limited, one of the 12 land-owning Alaska Native regional corporations established under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act--ANCSA--with an ownership interest in 4.65 million acres. Approximately 3,000 miles of Doyon's land borders BLM land. Many of those millions of acres were selected by Doyon for their economic development potential, consistent with the intent of ANCSA. The northernmost part of the planning area covers the traditional lands of the Inupiat people in the Arctic Slope Region.

This vast area includes enormous critical mineral potential of national and strategic importance. As our geostrategic adversaries continue to place tighter controls on minerals essential for defense, advanced technology, and manufacturing, America needs these resources responsibly developed in places like Alaska. Additionally, the area includes incredible oil and gas resources that help to contribute to America's energy dominance. Further, this region contains abundant timberlands and substantial sand and gravel material resources that are essential for roads, airstrips, and other infrastructure. Local access to these materials allows rural villages

in this region to avoid costly imports that contribute to the high cost of living in these communities.

Importantly, the area also contains the Dalton Highway and the right- of-way for the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System, Alaska's most essential piece of infrastructure and a nationally strategic asset for the United States. This system transports crude oil 800 miles from the North Slope oil fields to marine terminals in Valdez and provides the vital access necessary to develop the resources in the National Petroleum Reserve- Alaska, the ANWR Coastal Plain, and construct the Alaska LNG pipeline.

In 1971, the Department of the Interior issued Public Land Order-- PLO--5150 withdrawing from selection a 5.3 million acre stretch of Federal land to reserve it as a utility and transportation corridor to facilitate monetizing the oil reserves on the North Slope. These lands covered the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System right-of-way and the North Slope Haul Road, which was later named the Dalton Highway. The significance of these lands to Alaska cannot be understated; they represent the State of Alaska's highest priority land selections, and the State has top-filed for these lands pursuant to Section 906(e) of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, ANILCA.

After more than 60 years following the passage of the Alaska Statehood Act by Congress in 1958, Alaska has yet to receive its full land entitlement. To this day, over 60 percent of the land in Alaska is managed by the Federal Government. Key to the State's ability to finalize its land selections is the lifting of PLO 5150, which will enable the State to satisfy a large portion of its outstanding statehood land entitlement and unencumber other lands that have been selected to fulfill the entitlements of Alaska Native Corporations, the University of Alaska, and Alaska Native Vietnam Veteran land allotments.

In 2006, as directed by the Alaska Land Transfer Acceleration Act, sponsored by my colleague Senator Murkowski, BLM released a report finding that withdrawals on 152.18 million out of 158.96 million acres--95 percent--``have outlived their original purpose'' and ``could be lifted consistent with the protection of the public's interest.'' BLM recommended that PLOs be lifted on 50.1 million acres of land it manages in Alaska. In 2012, then Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar wrote Alaska Governor Sean Parnell that ``BLM is committed to working with the State to consider further modifications of PLO 5150`` and indicated that the BLM Alaska State Office would initiate the planning process for the Central Yukon planning area to evaluate the public lands within the utility corridor located north of the Yukon River and said, ``I consider fulfillment of the State of Alaska's land entitlement a top priority.''

Beginning in 2013, BLM began the formal public scoping process for the resource management plan, kicking off a multi-year-long planning process with dozens of public meetings and thousands of hours of hard work by BLM as part of the process of drafting an Environmental Impact Statement--EIS--to satisfy the National Environmental Policy Act. In December 2020, BLM released its Draft Resource Management Plan/EIS and identified Alternative C2 as the preferred alternative, blending resource protection and resource development, closing some 1 million acres to mineral material sales, but leaving 13.1 million acres open to locatable mineral entry. Importantly, Alternative C2 recommended full revocation of PLO 5150, enabling the State of Alaska's top-filed lands to become valid selections. It also recommended revocation of approximately 5.2 million acres of ANCSA 17(d)(1) withdraws opening land for selection by Alaska Native Vietnam-Era Veterans who qualify for a land allotment under the John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act, P.L. 116-9.

While not perfect, Alternative C2 served as an important discussion point and something the largest land stakeholders in the area--the State of Alaska and Doyon--could work with toward a balanced final Record of Decision. However, following the election of President Biden, he announced plans to review the Central Yukon RMP EIS, one of 70 Executive actions the Biden administration took targeting Alaska. In April 2024, BLM issued its Proposed RMP/Final EIS, identifying a new Alternative E that was not previously made available for public review and comment and contained sweeping restrictions on land use. The Proposed RMP/Final EIS had protests filed from Doyon Limited, the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation, the Alaska Miners Association, and the State of Alaska--all denied, ignoring Alaska Native voices and the people who live in and responsibly develop Alaska every day. This new Alternative E became the Central Yukon Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan in November 2024, which the passage of this joint resolution of disapproval would invalidate.

While the approved Central Yukon RMP applies only to the BLM-managed areas within the planning area, it affected access for other landholders in the region, principally Doyon and the State of Alaska. The Central Yukon RMP designated 21 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern spanning 3.6 million acres and reclassified Visual Resource Management areas in ways that hinder infrastructure development.

Section 1326 of ANILCA provides clear and unambiguous restrictions on executive branch actions with respect to future withdrawals and further studies or reviews without congressional approval. Under ANILCA's ``no more clause,'' BLM may not withdraw more than 5,000 acres, in the aggregate, without congressional authorization. Designation of ACECs that remove lands from operation of the public land laws is a de facto withdrawal and an insult to Congress's express intent in ANILCA, locking up critical resources that our Nation needs to counter our dependency on hostile foreign powers.

Doyon, the largest Alaska Native Corporation stakeholder in the Central Yukon Planning Area, notes these restrictive land designations complicate access to their lands and prevent it from realizing the economic and other benefits that Congress intended it would enjoy as a result of ANCSA's settlement of Alaska Native land claims. Doyon's letter of support for the disapproval resolution called the Central Yukon RMP ``misguided and harmful'' and cites the profound implications on the ability to place communication, electric transmission, and other infrastructure these land restrictions create, adding further obstacles to the extraordinary challenges faced by rural communities in Alaska, many of which are disconnected from the road system.

Furthermore, the approved Central Yukon RMP did not recommend revoking PLO 5150--which has long outlived its original purpose--or ANCSA 17(d)(1) withdrawals, with limited exceptions, frustrating the State's ability to fulfill its statehood land entitlement and perpetuating unnecessary encumbrances on public lands in contradiction to BLM's own findings in the Alaska Land Transfer Acceleration Act Report to Congress.

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 2024 Record of Decision and a reimplementation of the draft RMP and EIS issued in December 2020. The Executive order further directed the Secretary of the Interior to evaluate the potential rescission of PLO 5150, and Secretary Burgum has admirably taken concrete steps toward delivering on that commitment. This disapproval resolution would effectuate the President's directive in Executive Order 14153, immediately rescinding the Record of Decision and would advance the ongoing work to revoke PLO 5150 and review outdated ANCSA 17(d)(1) withdrawals predicated on the underlying EIS, which would not be invalidated by H.J. Res. 106.

The House has already passed this joint resolution, recognizing the impact that this highly restrictive plan would have on our national security, the massive Federal overreach stifling economic development opportunities, and the disregard for Alaska Native voices. I spoke of Doyon, Limited's letter of support earlier, but this resolution is also 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 the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation, the Alaska Native Regional Corporation for the Inupiat people living on the North Slope of Alaska. It is supported by the Alaska Miners Association, Americans for Prosperity, the American Energy Alliance, the National Federation of Independent Businesses, the American Exploration and Mining Association, Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions, the Resource Development Council for Alaska, as well as the Trump administration.

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

Mr. President, had Kaine amendment No. 3337 to Calendar No. 115, S. 2296, FY2026 National Defense Authorization Act, NDAA, been a recorded rollcall vote, I would have voted no.

Mr. President, I am down on the Senate floor here to try to pass two really important pieces of legislation for a great part of Alaska, and this is the Alaska Native community in my State. These are incredible, patriotic Americans. By the way, Alaska Natives serve at higher rates in the military than any other ethnic group in the country. They are great Americans. They add so much to our State. They are the first peoples of Alaska, and so in my State, it is almost about 20 percent of the population. So it is a population I care deeply about.

We work closely with them on so many different issues across so many different areas, and so I like to legislate in the areas that matter to them. And we are going to do that. You know, lately--and I am going to try to stay positive here; I have given speeches on the Senate floor about this before--some of my Democratic colleagues on the other side of the aisle have taken it out on the Alaska Native people in legislation, really kind of bad stuff. I am not going to be negative, but there has been this trend of anti-Alaska Native bias on the other side of the aisle. It has been very disappointing. To be honest, it has been puzzling.

But I am hoping today, these two bills that we are going to move forward that go to the heart of Alaska Native culture in one and Alaska Native patriotism in the other are going to be UC'd. I know my Republican colleagues have already passed on these.

So the first piece of legislation I want to bring up is what we call the Alaska's Right To Ivory Sales and Tradition. The acronym on that is the ARTIST Act.

Now, let me give you a little bit of background on this. For thousands of years Alaska Natives have responsibly harvested whales, walrus, other marine animals from our northern seas. These animals are eaten, shared, honored, and no part of the animal goes to waste.

They still do this tradition in my State. They have the right to do it under law. The bones, the ivory, the baleen, even all of those pieces are used for beautiful art. If you have had a chance to visit my office, you have seen the beautiful art that adorns the walls of my Senate office. Carvings made from whale baleen, walrus tusks, crafted by Alaska Native artists.

This is some of the most beautiful art in America. It is deeply ingrained in Alaska's culture, the ability to make this art. It also provides important economic opportunity for our artists in many of these remote villages, artists who rely on the ability to sell these works to Alaskans and the hundreds of thousands of people who come to my great State to visit who want to take home a piece of Alaska Native heritage. So it is a win-win-win for everybody, but it is an economic driver of a lot of small villages in my State.

And by the way, carving, harvesting walrus ivory is completely legal under Federal law, Federal regulations, Federal law. There is no question about that. However, there has been some, I guess, well- intentioned laws from some States that in an attempt to ban African elephant ivory, which we all want to do that--that is not allowed in America, by the way--States have gone too far and cast this huge net and said you can't buy any ivory products anywhere, including Alaska Native products from Alaska walrus harvesting.

This really has hurt my State. People coming up from States that have banned all ivory say: I can't take that home. I can't buy it. Sorry.

So this is a simple, simple bill. You know, if a visitor wants to come buy some ivory earrings in Alaska by one of our great Alaska Native artists and then bring them home to a State that has a ban on ivory, which is not sensible--again, walrus ivory, not African elephant ivory--we want to be able to say at the Federal level that we should be able to do this.

So that is what my ARTIST Act does. It prohibits States from banning the importation, sale, or possession of Alaskan Native handicrafts made with walrus ivory. Environmental groups support it. By the way, the Biden administration supported this. It is straightforward bipartisan legislation that recently was passed unanimously by the Commerce Committee.

So this is about as bipartisan as it gets. And what I want to do is to cut through the confusion that there now exists with certain States and a lot of tourists in my great State, to affirm the right of the Alaska Native people to continue these centuries-old practices of sustainable, respectful ivory carving, entirely within Federal law, and to be able to make sure that is clarified across the country.

So I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 178, that is S. 254; further, that the committee-reported substitute amendment be considered and agreed to, 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.

Yes, I agree to the modification.

Mr. President, I want to let people know back home that means that that bill, the ARTIST bill that we have been trying to get moved for a long time, just passed the U.S. Senate. So I want to thank my colleague from California, my friend from California who has worked with me, by the way, on one of the other bills that just passed. I was a cosponsor with Senator Padilla on that, so this is good Senate cooperation on these issues.

So that is an important issue for Alaskan Native heritage, culture, artists, and now it has passed the Senate. So, again, I want to thank Senator Padilla.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak up to 10 minutes prior to the scheduled rollcall vote.

Madam President, I am here on the floor today to ask unanimous consent to pass a very important resolution that I try to move forward every year. It is my Choose Respect Day resolution.

I want to thank Senator Schiff, my lead cosponsor on the other side of the aisle. And it is to kick off also Domestic Violence Awareness Month.

As a former AG like myself, this is really important to me and my State. I come down on the floor a lot to brag about the great State of Alaska in so many different areas, but this is one area where I don't like to brag about Alaska because there is not much to brag about. We have some of the highest rates of domestic violence and sexual assault than anyplace in the country--really bad.

So when I was attorney general a number of years ago, the Governor and I launched this big initiative called the Choose Respect Initiative. We changed the laws. We made perpetrators really pay if they were going to commit these heinous crimes in Alaska.

We got funding for lawyers and resources. We got different services, and we had ads all over TV in Alaska about choosing respect--real Alaska men choose respect; they don't commit these heinous acts; they don't hit their girlfriend; they don't do any of that kind of horrible stuff.

And it started to work in my State, to change the culture, which wasn't a good culture in Alaska. We are still doing that. So when I came to the Senate, I really wanted to continue this work. It is really important work--it has been bipartisan--to try to change the culture in our country.

We have very, very high rates--too high rates--of domestic violence and sexual assault in many places in America. We should all be focused on making sure the next generation of young men don't do that.

So one of the ways in which we have done that is my POWER Act, which has been to get pro bono legal services for domestic violence survivors and victims. This is an innovative idea that we started in Alaska and brought here to the Senate.

The POWER Act now has had over 61,000 attorneys across America provide pro bono legal assistance to survivors--61,000. That was from a bill here we had on the Senate floor. These are the kind of things we can do in the Senate, in the Congress, to address this very significant challenge in my State and across the country.

So this resolution builds on what we are doing across the board on many of the different Choose Respect initiatives that I have brought to the Congress in a bipartisan way over the years. It calls upon all of us to mark Choose Respect Day by teaching our youth about healthy relationships, supporting survivors, honoring those we have lost, and recommitting ourselves to the fundamental truth that every person deserves to live in freedom from violence and fear.

The call to choose respect is simple but powerful: If we live by it not just on October 1, as the resolution calls for, we can break the cycle of abuse, strengthen families, and build a safer, more respectful country.

I think, at this point right now in our Nation's history, we could all use that. I urge my colleagues to join me in passing this resolution. Together, let's honor survivors, remember victims, and choose respect in all we do.

Madam President, as if in legislative session and notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 431, which is at the desk.

I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon table with no intervening action or debate.

Madam President, I am very hopeful that my colleagues here will move forward on this bipartisan, clean continuing resolution so we can get our government open again.

I do want to just explain to the American people and maybe some of our friends in the media a little dirty secret that is going on down here on the Senate floor. A lot of my Democratic colleagues are getting frustrated, not with us--not with us. We have had three already cross over and vote with us. There are a lot more who want to do it.

They are frustrated because they know we have got to reopen the government. They know this is the way to do it, a simple, bipartisan, clean continuing resolution. We have been doing this all the time here in the Senate. We have done it over 10 times during the Biden administration on the Republican side, but there is frustration.

I will give you my sense of why there is frustration on the Democrat side. Usually, in this place, when you run for leader--Democrat leader, Republican leader--and you are in leadership, there is kind of an unwritten rule that the leader will protect the broader membership and broader Members--on votes and different things. That is kind of what leadership is about.

This is the first time I have seen in my entire time here in the U.S. Senate where, on the Democrat side, the broader membership seems to be protecting just the leader. We all know why. He is worried about his left flank; worried about getting primaried.

So my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are getting frustrated, not with us. They know this is the right way to do it.

They are getting frustrated because they think they are having to protect their leader. This isn't the way it works--is supposed to work here. The minority leader previously called blocking a clean, bipartisan CR to get bigger demands from their side ``political idiocy.''

What we are viewing right now is a lot of political idiocy coming from the other side, and my colleagues on the Democratic side are really starting to get frustrated, not with us but with their own leader.

I am hoping on this vote, in the next hour or so, for the American people, for the institution of the U.S. Senate, we have a couple more Democrat Senators who have the courage to break with the political idiocy we see right now on their side.

Vote with us. Reopen the government. They know it is the right thing to do. I hope that happens.

I yield the floor.

Vote on S. Res. 412

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Congressional Record a letter containing the legal opinion of the Government Accountability Office, No. B-337330, titled U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management-Applicability of the Congressional Review Act to 2024 Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program Record of Decision, dated August 25, 2025.

The letter provides notification that the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management 2024 Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program Record of Decision is a rule subject to the Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. Sec. 801 et seq.

Mr. President, it is Thursday afternoon here in the U.S. Senate, and I am going to come down and talk about the Alaskan of the Week. It is the best speech of the week, I think--the pages would agree; they are all nodding--because it talks about someone who is really amazing. This week is a really impressive story, I will tell you.

Normally, the ``Alaskan of the Week'' is kind of the wrapup bell, signal, for the Senate, for the press. They kind of know the week is coming to an end. But not today. We are still working before the summer August work period to try to get some of President Trump's nominees confirmed--it is a huge part of the Senate's duties--and we are trying to get cooperation from our colleagues on the other side of the aisle.

Now, why am I talking about this? Because I know the ``Alaskan of the Week'' speech--you know, millions of Americans tune in. It is like must-see TV when they are all watching. The press watches. So I just want to explain a little bit of what is going on here because we have this unprecedented blockade by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer-- that is not good for the Senate as an institution, and by the way, all the Democrats know that; it is not good for the country--to getting the President--his people--confirmed to help run the government.

It has never been done before. What do I mean? The way the Senate works--it is a really important chart here. The way the Senate works is, when we go to confirm nominees--you know, Cabinet officials and very important nominees; some who are controversial, some who aren't--a lot of times, the Senate moves, because there are so many of them, with a package of nominees. We usually take a big package, negotiate it, and then they come to the floor as a package agreed to by leadership, and we do what is called a unanimous consent request. We don't vote on each one. It might be a package of 100. And the majority leader will say: I move by unanimous consent to confirm these hundred nominees.

This happens all the time. This has been happening for hundreds of years in American history. Guess who stopped that tradition? The current Senate minority leader, Senator Schumer of New York.

Now, why would he do that? Look at these numbers. In George H.W. Bush--during his first term, 98 percent of the people confirmed for that administration--Democrat, Republican--were done by this unanimous consent model. We package them up, we bring them to the floor, we do a unanimous consent, and they are all passed. Nobody objects. This is the way to do it.

So, remember, this is cooperation. You need Democrats and Republicans in this great institution, the U.S. Senate, to do this to help the government work.

OK. President Clinton, same thing. Republicans did unanimous consent requests on 98 percent of the people in the Clinton administration-- civilians, not the generals and admirals.

George W. Bush got a little smaller--still 90 percent. So the Democrats worked with George W. Bush to confirm all his nominees.

Obama. Republicans worked with President Obama to confirm 90 percent through unanimous consent--big packages of nominees to get confirmed so the government can work.

President Trump's first term was a lot less. So all of a sudden, the Democrats are saying ``We are not going to cooperate as much during Trump 1,'' but still 65 percent of the nominees were packaged up, brought to the floor, unanimous consent. Let's move them. Did that. OK. You know, so there was a little bit of like, hey, you didn't help President Trump too much.

So with President Biden, it was less, but it was still way more than half--almost 60 percent. President Biden's guys

would come here. ``Hey, we want to get all these guys confirmed.'' We Republicans said ``All right. Let's put them in a package. All right. We will confirm a hundred here, a hundred there.'' Almost 60 percent of all Biden nominees were confirmed in that way--unanimous consent, quickly.

A lot of times, before the August work period, we will get big packages done.

So that is American history.

Look at the number for President Trump's second term. Can you see that? I want the American people to see that. Zero. Zero. Zero.

Like what the heck is Senator Schumer doing?

By the way, a lot of Democrat Senators who I talk to--I have good friends over there--they are embarrassed by that number, by the way. They are embarrassed by that number. Zero percent.

Now, why do you think Senator Schumer is doing that? Because he cares about the Senate as an institution? Nope. Because he wants to help us run the government? President Trump won fair and square; he needs to get his people into office to run our great government? Nope. Certainly don't want to do that. We all know this.

I am going to reveal a little secret here in the Senate. This is fully driven by the far-left wing of the Democratic Party, OK? I mean, we are talking the anti-Israel, pro-Hamas wing. We are talking the defund-the-police wing. We are talking the open border wing. I mean, the far-left crazies of the Democratic Party are driving the Senate minority leader to go to zero, because they are telling him: You have got to resist the Trump administration. So he is listening to them.

Look at that, America. Zero percent. It has never happened in U.S. history. I hope our friends in the media write about it. It is unprecedented. And the vast majority of Democratic Senators who I have talked to are embarrassed by that number.

So hopefully we are going to get some kind of an agreement. We will see. But maybe not. We will stay here. Look, I am ready to stay here as long as it takes, because this is ridiculous. And one guy is blocking it--the minority leader of the U.S. Senate--because he is kowtowing to the far left, left, left crazy wing of the Democratic Party to resist. And we think that is good for America right there? It is embarrassing. If you are a Senate Democrat, that is embarrassing.

So I am going to switch gears to a much better topic.

Like I said, normally this would be the last speech of the week, but it is not because we are still here. We will keep plugging away. We are going to vote to confirm a lot more of President Trump's Cabinet. We have to do it one at a time--one at a time--because there is no cooperation, as there has been throughout American history. So we will do it the hard way.

I applaud Majority Leader John Thune for saying: Hey, let's try. We are still trying to get an agreement. Maybe they will move this number up a little bit. But that is an embarrassment. Every Senator knows it, and every Senator here knows why it is zero. Not guarding the institution. Not trying to help the American people run their government. It is nervousness from some of the Democrat leaders about their far-left, extreme, open border, defund the police--you know, the whackos are driving it. So we will keep plugging along.