[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 144 (Wednesday, September 3, 2025)]
[House]
[Pages H3787-H3791]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 1510
PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL OF THE RULE SUBMITTED BY THE
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT RELATING TO ``CENTRAL YUKON RECORD OF
DECISION AND APPROVED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN''
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 672, I call
up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 106) providing for congressional
disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule
submitted by the Bureau of Land Management relating to ``Central Yukon
Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan'', and ask for
its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 672, the joint
resolution is considered read.
The text of the joint resolution is as follows:
H.J. Res. 106
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress
disapproves the rule submitted by the Bureau of Land
Management relating to ``Central Yukon Record of Decision and
Approved Resource Management Plan'' (issued November 12,
2024, as a record of decision and resource management plan,
and a letter of opinion from the Government Accountability
Office dated June 25, 2025, printed in the Congressional
Record on June 26, 2025, on pages S3554-S3556, concluding
that such record of decision and resource management plan is
a rule under the Congressional Review Act), and such rule
shall have no force or effect.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The joint resolution shall be debatable for
1 hour, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking
minority member of the Committee on Natural Resources or their
respective designees.
The gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman) and the gentleman from
Colorado (Mr. Neguse) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arkansas.
General Leave
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous material on H.J. Res. 106.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Arkansas?
There was no objection.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.J. Res. 106, a
Congressional Review Act resolution led by Congressman Nick Begich of
Alaska. This CRA reverses a resource management plan, or RMP, for the
central Yukon region in Alaska, which locked up an astonishing 13.3
million acres of land.
Alaska is crucial to our national security and economic prosperity.
In 2020, President Trump announced a draft RMP for the central Yukon
that, among other provisions, revoked Public Land Order 5150 and
unleashed American energy.
For more than a decade, the State of Alaska has worked on this RMP to
revoke Public Land Order 5150, which would unlock millions of acres of
land from restrictive, de facto wilderness management and return it to
multiple use.
Unfortunately, the previous administration reversed this decision
against the wishes of Alaskans and finalized a new RMP that enshrined
Public Land Order 5150.
On his first day in office in 2025, President Trump issued Executive
Order No. 14153 on ``Unleashing Alaska's Extraordinary Resource
Potential,'' which directly called for repealing the Biden
administration's central Yukon RMP. This CRA advances President Trump's
executive order.
Why is this CRA so important? Revoking Public Land Order 5150 is the
first step in allowing the State of Alaska to acquire lands that are
critical to two essential projects: Ambler Road and the Alaska LNG
pipeline.
Currently, our adversaries have a choke hold on worldwide mineral
supply chains. Alaska, our 49th State, has rich deposits of 49 out of
the 50 minerals on the critical minerals list.
With such abundant resources in our own backyard, it should be
appalling to
[[Page H3788]]
every American that the United States relies 100 percent on imports for
12 of the 50 critical minerals on the critical minerals list. What is
more, our Nation is 50 percent net import reliant for an additional 29
critical minerals on the list.
The smartphones that we carry around every day in our pockets contain
15 critical minerals. Computers, home appliances, and batteries all
rely on critical minerals.
The Ambler Mining District in Alaska is home to some of the largest
deposits of these minerals, including copper, cobalt, and zinc. Just
four deposits in the Ambler Mining District alone have an estimated
resource value of $26 billion.
Currently, there is no way to access these minerals. To do so, we
need to construct Ambler Road. Last year, the Biden administration
denied a permit for Ambler Road, effectively preventing Alaskans from
developing their own resources.
Passing this CRA is the first step in allowing Alaska to acquire
these lands outright, creating long-term certainty for this project.
Constructing this road and allowing access to the Ambler Mining
District is expected to create thousands of new jobs and produce $1.1
billion of revenue for Alaska. Road construction alone will create more
than 350 jobs, creating economic opportunity desperately needed in
rural Alaska.
Keep in mind, this is only one project unlocked by this CRA. This CRA
will also help the advancement of the Alaska LNG pipeline project.
Global demand for energy is expected to double by 2050, and our
domestic energy production must rise to meet that demand. With the rise
of data centers and AI fueling this growth, it is more important than
ever that we produce energy here at home rather than ceding energy
dominance to hostile foreign nations like China and Russia.
Once online, the project will produce 3.5 billion cubic feet of
natural gas daily and sustain more than 10,000 jobs. Through this
project, Alaskans will gain long-term and affordable gas for home
heating and industrial needs.
Currently, the gas supply for Alaska from the Cook Inlet is
uncertain, and local utilities are evaluating alternate supplies,
including importing LNG. It goes against all common sense to import LNG
into Alaska when the State is blessed with abundant resources that can
supply the State and beyond.
Every action must be taken to provide North Slope-produced gas to
Alaskans for their home heating and local industry needs. In addition
to providing gas to Alaska, the Alaska LNG pipeline will be able to
export 20 million tons of LNG yearly, reaching our Asian allies in 6
days with no strategic choke points. It is no exaggeration to say that
creating this pipeline is one of the most crucial steps we can take to
counter China's influence in the Indo-Pacific.
Earlier this year, I led a bipartisan congressional delegation to
Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea. Taiwan has already signed a letter of
intent with the State of Alaska to purchase Alaskan LNG, and both Japan
and South Korea are deeply interested in pursuing American energy from
Alaska as well as other Pacific Rim nations.
The message we heard at each stop was universal and resounding:
Without certainty in the timeline and our permitting system, these
countries won't be able to buy our energy.
Make no mistake, these are our allies, and they desperately want to
buy American. They would much rather get their energy from the North
Slope than from China and Russia, the friends of North Korea.
Today's CRA is the first step in providing energy certainty to Alaska
and our allies abroad. We are taking strong, decisive action to remove
barriers that prevent us from accessing our own energy and minerals.
By unleashing Alaska's extraordinary resource potential, we are
providing energy certainty and affordability to Alaska and creating
thousands of well-paying jobs, generating billions of dollars in
revenue for Federal and State coffers, and keeping America and our
allies safe from foreign adversaries.
I commend Representative Begich, the entire Alaska delegation, and
Governor Dunleavy for their work on this effort.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the joint resolution,
and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
As promised, we are back debating another Congressional Review Act
disapproval resolution. This time, as was referenced, it is in regard
to the resource management plan for the central Yukon in the heart of
Alaska, governing over 13 million acres of public land in central and
northern Alaska, some of the most culturally significant landscapes in
the United States.
This region includes the central Yukon River watershed and the Dalton
Highway corridor, areas that are vital to both biodiversity and
community survival. These lands are also interconnected with the Gates
of the Arctic National Park and Preserve and the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge. They are home to caribou, salmon, and sheep species
that Alaska Native and rural communities depend on for food and
cultural traditions.
The existing RMP sets strong protections in response to declining
populations of these important species. It created 3.6 million acres of
areas of critical environmental concern.
I will also mention here that the one voice we haven't heard from on
the House floor is from the Tribal communities impacted by both the
resource management plan and this particular resolution to reverse the
resource management plan. These lands promote community health, support
sustenance, and sustain the wild food economies that numerous Alaska
Native communities rely on.
The current resource management plan is the result of over a decade,
10 years, of work between the Tribes in the central Yukon as well as
the Bureau of Land Management and other stakeholders. Six Tribes worked
as cooperating agencies in the development of this plan.
I know I have belabored this, Mr. Speaker, but it merits mentioning
again. Rather than simply amending the resource management plan, doing
the hard work required in the agency to perform the consultations
necessary to then change the RMP, if folks have concerns, good faith
concerns about the contours of that resource management plan, that is
the way to do it.
{time} 1520
Instead, my colleagues have chosen to use the Congressional Review
Act, a very blunt instrument. Using the CRA, unlike pursuing an
administrative update, would lock out--lock out--Tribal engagement in
BLM's existing processes.
Using the CRA to overturn an RMP would also ban the agency not from
issuing this resource management plan but from issuing any resource
management plan like it. That is reckless.
I understand that my colleagues have a disagreement with respect to
the contours of this resource management plan. My colleagues should
work through the Department of the Interior to change it. That is the
way that it should be done.
Mr. Speaker, there is a lot on the line with respect to the fate of
this particular CRA resolution before us. I mentioned before that we
are in uncharted territory because the House has not pursued this type
of vehicle to overturn resource management plans in the past. It is
unprecedented.
It is important for my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to
recognize the gravity of taking this step. It is one that I would hope
that some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle might
reconsider.
Mr. Speaker, I oppose the resolution for those reasons, and I reserve
the balance of my time.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Alaska (Mr. Begich), the lead sponsor of this legislation.
Mr. BEGICH. Mr. Speaker, we are in uncharted territory. We are in
uncharted territory because the previous administration took us here.
At the end of the day, we hear from voices across America, but we
don't hear from the voices of the people of my home State. The people
who I have spoken with, the landowners, the Alaska Natives, who were
not consulted by the previous administration in the development and
approval of this resource management plan, have stepped forward and
said: We need to remove
[[Page H3789]]
this plan, and we need to make sure that something like this does not
happen again in the future.
I rise today in strong support of H.J. Res. 106, a resolution to
overturn the Bureau of Land Management's 2024 Central Yukon Resource
Management Plan. This Biden-era management plan locks up more than 13
million acres of land in Alaska, part of a region that spans 56 million
acres in my State.
The plan threatens economic opportunity and undermines national
security while ignoring the needs of everyday Alaskans. The plan also
designates more than 3.6 million acres as Areas of Critical
Environmental Concern with little or no justification.
The Biden plan restricts access to Alaska Native lands, violating
commitments made under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act. Sadly,
the plan also continues outdated land withdrawals that block
responsible access to our Nation's critical mineral resources.
Mr. Speaker, this is not balance. It is Federal overreach that is
ensuring that Alaska's wealth stays in the ground, unavailable to the
people of one of America's most impoverished regions.
The plan also obstructs projects vital to America's future, such as
the Ambler Road, which will bring access to strategic and critical
minerals; and the Alaska LNG project, which is projected to deliver 3.5
billion cubic feet of natural gas per day and create more than 10,000
jobs in Alaska.
These projects are essential to American energy security. They are
essential to Alaska's economic growth, and they are essential to
lowering costs for America's working families.
This resolution supports President Trump's commitment to unleashing
Alaska's extraordinary energy and resource potential. It restores
balance to public land policy, ensures that we meet our commitments to
Alaska's Native communities, and allows for opportunity in an area of
my State that is desperately in need.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.J. Res. 106 to
strengthen America's energy and mineral dominance, to strengthen our
economic and national security, and to keep our promises to the people
of Alaska.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I will point out the great work that my colleague from
Alaska has done on this issue and the potential that is in Alaska.
We had the Committee on Natural Resources up there last week, and we
had a bipartisan group there turning around and looking at all of the
many, many resources that are in Alaska, the vast size of Alaska, and
the burdens that the Federal Government has put on the State and
really, I think, fallen short of living up to the promises that were
made when Alaska became a State. We talked about Native Americans and
their input in the process.
Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record this letter from Doyon Limited.
Doyon, Limited,
Fairbanks, AK, July 21, 2025.
Hon. Nicholas J. Begich III
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Representative Begich: Thank you for introducing H.J.
Res. 106, to disapprove the November 12, 2024, Central Yukon
Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan
(Central Yukon RMP). Doyon, Limited (Doyon) strongly supports
this joint resolution and urges Congress's and the
President's swift action to reject this misguided and harmful
planning decision.
Doyon is a major stakeholder in the Bureau of Land
Management's (BLM) Central Yukon RMP planning process. Many
large tracts of lands that were conveyed to Doyon under the
Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) are surrounded
by, or abut, BLM-managed public lands. Doyon owns substantial
interests in the Central Yukon Planning Area, holding an
ownership interest in approximately 4.65 million acres. In
addition, it has selected an additional 127,000 acres in the
Planning Area under ANCSA that have not yet been conveyed.
Doyon's land base shares approximately 3,000 miles of border
with BLM lands--potentially more than any other Indigenous
landowner in the nation. Consistent with ANCSA's intent, much
of the land that Doyon selected was selected for its economic
development potential.
As Doyon explained to BLM throughout the Central Yukon RMP
planning process, further enveloping Doyon's lands within new
or expanded Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs)
and other restrictive land designations, and otherwise
imposing restrictions on use of surrounding lands, will
further complicate access to and use of Doyon lands, and
potentially prevent Doyon from fully realizing the economic
and other benefits that Congress intended it would enjoy as a
result of ANCSA's settlement of aboriginal land claims. In
addition, because oil and gas, mineral, and other resource
prospects often straddle federal, state, and/or private
lands, the more that BLM planning processes place lands off
limits to multiple uses, the more likely resource development
opportunities will be unavailable on Doyon (and other non-
federal) lands in the vicinity, impeding Doyon's ability to
make economically productive use of its lands as Congress
intended when it settled aboriginal land claims in Alaska.
The management decisions made in the 2024 Central Yukon RMP
also will have long-term implications for communications,
electric transmission, and other infrastructure activities in
the region, adding further obstacles to what already are
extraordinary challenges to connecting rural communities in
Alaska.
Doyon devoted significant resources to engaging with BLM
over the course of the Central Yukon RMP planning process to
ensure that the result of that process reflects the
principles of multiple use and sustained yield established
under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, as well as
the unique framework that Congress established in Alaska
under ANCSA and Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation
Act (ANILCA). Unfortunately, despite these concerted efforts
of Doyon and others, the 2024 plan fails to do that.
Key flaws justifying congressional disapproval of the 2024
Central Yukon RMP--as further detailed in the protest that
Doyon submitted in response to the Central Yukon Proposed
Resource Management Plan and Final Environmental Impact
Statement released by BLM on April 19, 2024--include the
following:
The 2024 Central Yukon RMP improperly designates certain
ACECs/Research Natural Areas by including areas that do not
meet applicable requirements for designation and management
of ACECs and improperly determines special management
attention is required. It also improperly designates ACECs
that effectively surround or restrict access to Doyon-
conveyed lands, as well as that include Doyon-selected lands.
The 2024 Central Yukon RMP fails to appropriately address
impacts of right-of-way exclusion and avoidance areas on
access and other activities.
The 2024 Central Yukon RMP fails to adequately and
appropriately address access rights guaranteed under Section
1323(b) and Title XI of ANILCA.
The 2024 Central Yukon RMP inappropriately concludes that
hypothetical future development of mineral deposits in the
Ambler Mining District, Wiseman East and West deposits, and
the Ray Mountains could ``significantly restrict subsistence
uses and have a disproportionate negative impact'' on certain
``environmental justice communities'' as well as
``significantly restrict subsistence uses for'' certain
communities.
The 2024 Central Yukon RMP fails to fully consider
potential impacts of designating certain lands as Visual
Resource Management (VRM) Class II and redesignate them as
VRM Class III or IV.
The 2024 Central Yukon RMP improperly ignores the long
history of BLM's calling for the lifting of the ANCSA
17(d)(1) withdrawals and fails to provide a rational
explanation for retaining those withdrawals other than for
the limited purposes of selection by Alaska Native Vietnam-
era veterans.
The 2024 Central Yukon RMP violated the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in adopting a new alternative
not made available to the public for review and comment and
in not providing the public an opportunity to provide
informed comment after correction of an error in stated ANCSA
17(d)(1) acreages.
We appreciate your efforts to move forward with disapproval
of the 2024 Central Yukon RMP and we urge Congress and the
President to move quickly to enact this joint resolution.
Please let us know if you have any questions or if we can
provide any additional information.
Sincerely,
Sarah E. Obed,
SVP External Affairs Doyon, Limited.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I will read from this letter to show what
is really happening in Alaska.
It says: ``Doyon strongly supports this joint resolution and urges
Congress' and the President's swift action to reject this misguided and
harmful planning decision.
``Many large tracts of lands that were conveyed to Doyon under the
Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act [ANCSA] are surrounded by, or abut,
BLM-managed public lands. Doyon owns substantial interests in the
Central Yukon Planning Area, holding an ownership interest in
approximately 4.65 million acres.
``Doyon's land base shares approximately 3,000 miles of border with
BLM lands--potentially more than any other indigenous landowner in the
Nation. Consistent with ANCSA's intent, much of the land that Doyon
selected was selected for its economic development potential.
[[Page H3790]]
``As Doyon explained to BLM throughout the Central Yukon RMP planning
process, further enveloping Doyon's lands within new or expanded Areas
of Critical Environmental Concern [ACECs] and other restrictive land
designations, and otherwise imposing restrictions on use of surrounding
lands, will further complicate access to and use of Doyon lands, and
potentially prevent Doyon from fully recognizing the economic and other
benefits that Congress intended it would enjoy as a result of ANCSA's
settlement of aboriginal land claims.''
That is from the people who were affected on the ground by this
misguided resource management plan that the previous administration put
in place. It is an honor to be here today to be able to use the CRA to,
hopefully, reverse that plan and prevent other administrations in the
future, from either party, from putting such ridiculous management
plans in place.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, the chairman read from a letter there. I will read from
a letter that I think the Speaker might find interesting. This is a
letter from the Tanana Chiefs Conference in opposition to this
resolution.
Who is this conference made up of, you might ask, Mr. Speaker? It is
made up of 37 federally recognized Tribes and villages across the Yukon
River Basin. These Tribes served as cooperating agencies in the RMP
development process working to ensure protection for critical salmon
habitat and other interests, and they endorsed the RMP after extensive
consultation. They oppose this resolution, among many others.
Mr. Speaker, I do say that it is important to recognize what this
resolution, which I think the chairman, if I am not misquoting him,
called a hammer, will do.
My view is very simple. This hammer that Republicans have proposed
risks precluding these agencies from engaging in any type of rulemaking
or resource management planning that is substantially similar to the
resource management plan before us. I will give a simple example of
what that looks like in practice.
This Central Yukon Resource Management Plan opens up 11 million acres
to selection by eligible Alaska Native Vietnam-era veterans under the
Dingell Act.
{time} 1530
For those who are watching, the resource management plan allows and
enables Alaska natives who served our country so bravely during the
Vietnam war to access upwards of 11 million acres of lands at issue.
Here is the problem, Mr. Speaker. By passing this resolution of
disapproval, this CRA vehicle, it is not simply eliminating that
provision, along with all the other provisions in the resource
management plan, it is potentially risking the ability of a future
administration, including this one, from issuing any resource
management plan that provides a similar benefit.
What happens when a court 2 years from now, 3 years from now, or 5
years from now rules that the Republican resolution that you all are
poised to pass today precludes the BLM from giving any access to native
Vietnam-era veterans in accessing this land?
When we call this a blunt instrument, that is what we are
referencing. I understand that my colleagues disagree with a variety of
different components of the resource management plan. They are
fortunate that the Secretary of the Interior happens to be a former
Republican Governor of North Dakota, and I imagine if they call him
that he will pursue a reopening of this resource management plan.
However, taking this step, foreclosing the ability of those Alaska
natives who are Vietnam-era veterans from being able to access these
lands and precluding that kind of benefit into perpetuity by virtue of
using the CRA is reckless. There is no other word to describe it.
I would hope my colleagues would, again, reconsider and follow the
process of regular order. That is the way to pursue the changes that
they seek.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, this idea that Alaska native Vietnam-era veterans can't
select lands is just factually inaccurate and fear-mongering.
Congress has already statutorily codified the Alaska Native Vietnam-
era Veterans Land Allotment Program in 2019. Nothing in this CRA
repeals those requirements under the 2019 law. In fact, the House just
passed a 5-year extension of this program in July. To suggest that we
are now somehow unsupportive of this program is ludicrous.
Congress is using the CRA for this RMP because there weren't enough
public land order revocations, not because there were too many. Keeping
the withdrawal revocations for Alaska native Vietnam-era veterans and
adding new withdrawal revocations would be entirely consistent with the
CRA. The argument is ironic coming from my colleagues on the other side
of the aisle as Secretary Haaland unnecessarily delayed the
implementation of this program for years, despite strong demands from
the Alaska delegation that outdated PLOs be lifted so land selections
could begin.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alaska (Mr.
Begich) who understands this better than anyone.
Mr. BEGICH. Mr. Speaker, fewer than 20 Alaska native Vietnam-era
veterans have received their conveyances. A big part of the reason why
so few of the more than 2,000 eligible Vietnam-era veterans or their
heirs have received those lands is because they were delayed or
outright blocked by the previous administration.
The previous administration blocked their ability to select and
receive their lands. To hear my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, in this
Chamber suggesting that somehow Republicans are standing in the way of
Vietnam-era veteran land conveyances in my home State is ludicrous. It
is simply not true.
In fact, my bill extends the available time for them to make those
selections by 5 years, and there is nothing in this CRA that prevents
them from making those selections. We hope that they do. In fact, we
want more land to be available to those families. In fact, there are
some communities in Alaska where Vietnam-era veterans who are eligible
in this program have to select land hundreds of miles away from their
own community.
We are trying to unlock the State of Alaska, Mr. Speaker. It is my
colleagues on the other side of the aisle in this Chamber that have
repeatedly blocked our ability to do so.
Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I am not in the predictions business, but I can
confidently predict--and it is why one of the reasons this exchange is
so important--that this particular exchange will appear in litigation 2
years from now, 3 years from now, 5 years from now, or 10 years from
now.
This is untested. The Congressional Review Act has never been used
before to repeal a resource management plan, so we don't know how a
Federal court is going to construe this Congress' decision to en masse
disapprove of a resource management plan that did provide for the
allotment for Alaska natives who are Vietnam-era veterans to access
these lands.
I understand the chairman is making the case here on the floor. He
made it during the debate on the Rules Committee. I remember this back
in July. He maintains that this congressional resolution of approval is
just limited to the energy portions of the resource management plan.
That is not what the resolution says.
The resolution of disapproval disapproves of the resource management
plan in its entirety. I understand that the statutory provisions that
provide Alaska natives with the ability, those who are Vietnam-era
veterans to access these lands, remains codified. That is not up for
debate.
The problem is that Republicans have decided to disapprove, to use
this blunt instrument of this particular allotment, or rather access
that the prior administration as was noted, included in this resource
management plan. We have no idea how a Federal court is going to
construe the actions of the Congress as it relates to the different
[[Page H3791]]
component pieces in the resource management plan if and when a future
administration, including this one, decides to take that step.
It is one of the reasons why a Congressional Review Act or rather,
the Congressional Review Act has not been deployed in this way
previously because it is risky.
My colleague from Alaska seemed very upset. I don't disagree. I share
his frustration. I support, by the way, the legislation that he
mentioned. The legislation he was referencing is not the bill that is
before this Congress. I don't quite understand the impetus behind
extending the time as he noted to 5 years while you are simultaneously
passing a resolution disapproving of a resource management plan that
provided the very access to these lands that you purport to want, but
that is for him to explain.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 1540
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time. I am
prepared to close and reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to
close. Again, not to belabor the point here, but I do think that last
exchange was instructive and revealing.
I remember very well the debate that this House engaged in a mere 3
months ago, 2\1/2\ months ago, regarding the budget bill and the
terrible cuts to Medicaid that this Chamber, Republicans, passed, and
that the President signed into law. I remember after that legislation
was signed into law, several of my Republican colleagues, including one
Republican Senator in particular, bemoaning the Medicaid cuts that he
had just voted for.
Mr. Speaker, I am sure you are familiar with Mark Twain's old adage
that history doesn't repeat itself, but it often rhymes. It does feel a
little bit like deja vu because in the case of these CRAs, I have no
doubt that several of my colleagues, including several of my colleagues
who are championing these resolutions, will find that down the road
they will regret being so vociferous in their support for the
resolutions of disapproval of these resource management plans when a
Federal court decides that the agencies, the BLM, the Department of the
Interior writ large can't protect or, rather, enact protections in the
way that it had in the past because Republicans decided to use this
blunt instrument.
I think we are going on hour number two here. I believe we have
another hour of debate on another resolution of disapproval that will
be coming up next. For all the reasons I have articulated, I would hope
my colleagues will oppose this.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to
close.
This CRA is crucial to unleashing Alaska's abundant natural
resources. It will unleash billions of dollars' worth of oil, natural
gas, and critical minerals that are critical not only to Alaska's
economy and security but also to the economic and energy security of
the United States and will extend further to our allies around the
world.
This is a very important issue. This CRA shifts land management back
to Alaskans and away from NGOs and environmentalists in the lower 48
who have had way too much of an oversized impact on the decisions made
in Alaska. It is essential to projects that will create tens of
thousands of jobs, generate billions of dollars in revenue for the U.S.
Treasury and the State of Alaska, and again make our Nation less
reliant on hostile foreign nations.
I commend Representative Begich once again for his work on this
effort. He is a tremendous and fierce advocate for Alaska. Through his
efforts, we are helping President Trump and his administration advance
executive orders and usher in the golden age of American and Alaskan
energy dominance.
Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of this joint resolution, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Van Orden). All time for debate has
expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 672, the previous question is ordered on
the joint resolution.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the joint
resolution.
The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed and read a third
time, and was read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the joint
resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this question will be postponed.
____________________