[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 85 (Tuesday, May 19, 2026)]
[House]
[Pages H3567-H3570]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            NORTH DAKOTA TRUST LANDS COMPLETION ACT OF 2026

  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 2252) to authorize the relinquishment and in lieu selection 
of land and minerals in the State of North Dakota, to restore land and 
minerals to Indian Tribes within the State of North Dakota, and for 
other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 2252

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``North Dakota Trust Lands 
     Completion Act of 2026''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) North dakota enabling act.--The term ``North Dakota 
     Enabling Act'' means the Act of February 22, 1889 (25 Stat. 
     676, chapter 180).
       (2) Reservation.--The term ``reservation'' means any Indian 
     reservation located wholly or partially within the State of 
     North Dakota and recognized under United States treaty, 
     Executive order, or Act of Congress.
       (3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.
       (4) State.--The term ``State'' means the State of North 
     Dakota, acting through the North Dakota Board of University 
     and School Lands and its agent, the Department of Trust 
     Lands.
       (5) State land grant parcel.--The term ``State land grant 
     parcel'' means--
       (A) a parcel of land granted to the State of North Dakota 
     by Congress--
       (i) on statehood; or
       (ii) through a grant pursuant to the North Dakota Enabling 
     Act;
       (B) a section of land numbered 16 or 36 granted to the 
     State of North Dakota by Congress for school purposes;
       (C) a parcel of land selected by the State of North Dakota 
     as indemnity for any section of land numbered 16 or 36; and
       (D) a parcel of land other than a parcel of land described 
     in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) obtained by the State after 
     statehood.
       (6) Unappropriated federal land.--
       (A) In general.--The term ``unappropriated Federal land'' 
     means public land administered by the Bureau of Land 
     Management located within the State of North Dakota, 
     including public land that is mineral in character.
       (B) Exclusions.--The term ``unappropriated Federal land'' 
     does not include--
       (i) land (including an interest in land) acquired by the 
     Bureau of Land Management;
       (ii) any area of critical environmental concern established 
     pursuant to section 202(c)(3) of the Federal Land Policy and 
     Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1712(c)(3)); or
       (iii) land that is--

       (I) withdrawn from--

       (aa) entry, appropriation, or disposal under the public 
     land laws;
       (bb) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; or
       (cc) disposition under all laws pertaining to mineral and 
     geothermal leasing or mineral materials;

       (II) located within a component of the National Landscape 
     Conservation System;
       (III) designated as a Research Natural Area;
       (IV) located within any reservation;
       (V) located within--

       (aa) T. 147 N., R. 95 W.;
       (bb) T. 148 N., R. 95 W.;
       (cc) T. 148 N., R. 96 W.; or
       (dd) T. 149 N., R. 95 W.;

       (VI) located within a United States military reservation; 
     or
       (VII) designated by Congress or the President for 
     conservation purposes.

     SEC. 3. RELINQUISHMENT AND SELECTION; CONVEYANCE.

       (a) Relinquishment and Selection.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to valid existing rights, if the 
     State elects to relinquish all right, title, and interest of 
     the State in and to a State land grant parcel located wholly 
     or partially within the boundaries of any reservation, the 
     Secretary shall authorize the State to select in accordance 
     with this Act 1 or more parcels of unappropriated Federal 
     land of substantially equivalent value.
       (2) Selection.--
       (A) In general.--Subject to a mutual agreement between the 
     State and the Secretary, the land exchange authorized under 
     paragraph (1) may be carried out in a single phase or 
     multiple phases.
       (B) List.--For each phase of the land exchange, the State 
     shall provide to the Secretary a selection list in accordance 
     with this Act, including all selected parcels of 
     unappropriated Federal land of substantially equivalent 
     value.
       (C) Adjustments.--Adjustments to parcels included in the 
     selection list for each phase may be made as necessary, not 
     later than 120 days of delivery of the list to the Secretary, 
     to equalize the value of State land grant parcels and the 
     overall value of the parcels of unappropriated Federal land 
     selected.
       (3) Approval.--Not later than 180 days after the date on 
     which the State makes a selection for each phase under 
     paragraph (2), the Secretary shall approve or reject, in 
     whole or in part, the selection for that phase.
       (4) Review.--Nothing in this subsection precludes the 
     Secretary from conducting an environmental review of any 
     parcel proposed for relinquishment under paragraph (1) if the 
     Secretary determines that an environmental review is 
     appropriate.
       (b) Conveyance.--
       (1) Conveyance by secretary.--
       (A) In general.--Not later than 60 days after the date on 
     which the Secretary approves a State selection of 
     unappropriated Federal land under subsection (a)(3), the 
     Secretary shall initiate the actions necessary to convey to 
     the State the unappropriated Federal land.
       (B) Requirements.--Conveyance of unappropriated Federal 
     land by the Secretary under this Act--
       (i) shall be by patent or deed in a form acceptable to the 
     State and the Secretary; and
       (ii) shall not be considered a sale, exchange, or 
     conveyance for purposes of section 203, 205, 206, or 209 of 
     the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 
     1713, 1715, 1716, 1719).
       (2) Relinquishment and conveyance by state.--
       (A) In general.--As consideration for the conveyance of 
     unappropriated Federal land under paragraph (1), on the date 
     on which the

[[Page H3568]]

     unappropriated Federal land is conveyed to the State, the 
     State shall concurrently relinquish and convey to the 
     Secretary all right, title, and interest of the State in and 
     to the State land grant parcel identified for relinquishment 
     under subsection (a)(1).
       (B) Title.--The State shall convey to the Secretary title, 
     free of any financial claims, liabilities, or other financial 
     encumbrances, to all parcels relinquished under subparagraph 
     (A).
       (C) Limitation.--Relinquishment and conveyance by the State 
     of a State land grant parcel under this Act shall not be 
     considered an exchange or acquisition for purposes of section 
     205 or 206 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 
     1976 (43 U.S.C. 1715, 1716).
       (c) Succession to Rights and Obligations.--Each party to 
     which land is conveyed under this Act shall, to the fullest 
     extent allowable under Federal and State law, succeed to the 
     rights and obligations of the conveying party with respect to 
     any lease, right-of-way, permit, or other valid existing 
     right to which the land is subject.
       (d) Management After Relinquishment.--
       (1) Reservation.--If a State land grant parcel relinquished 
     by the State and conveyed to the Secretary under this Act is 
     located wholly or partially within the boundaries of any 
     reservation, on request of the applicable Indian Tribe, the 
     portion of the State land grant parcel located within the 
     boundaries of the reservation shall be--
       (A) taken into trust by the Secretary on behalf of, and for 
     the benefit of, the Indian Tribe on the date of the 
     conveyance; and
       (B) considered to be a part of the reservation of the 
     Indian Tribe.
       (2) Consultation required.--Prior to the conveyance of a 
     State land grant parcel located wholly or partially within 
     the boundaries of any reservation, the State and the 
     Secretary shall consult with affected Indian Tribes, 
     including the Indian Tribe the land of which is subject to 
     conveyance in accordance with Executive Order 13175 (25 
     U.S.C. 5301 note; relating to consultation and coordination 
     with Indian tribal governments) and other applicable laws.
       (e) Withdrawal.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to valid rights in existence on 
     the date of enactment of this Act, all unappropriated Federal 
     land selected by the State for conveyance under this Act, 
     effective beginning on the date on which the State makes the 
     selection for such Federal land and ending on the date 
     described in paragraph (2), is withdrawn from all forms of--
       (A) entry, appropriation, or disposal under the public land 
     laws;
       (B) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and
       (C) disposition under all laws pertaining to mineral and 
     geothermal leasing or mineral materials.
       (2) Date described.--The date referred to in paragraph (1) 
     is the date on which, as applicable--
       (A) the unappropriated Federal land is conveyed by the 
     Secretary to the State;
       (B) the Secretary rejects the selection under subsection 
     (a)(3); or
       (C) the State withdraws the selection.

     SEC. 4. VALUATION.

       (a) Equal Value.--With respect to a State land grant parcel 
     conveyed under this Act in consideration for a parcel of 
     unappropriated Federal land selected in accordance with this 
     Act--
       (1) the overall value of the State land grant parcel and 
     the overall value of the parcel of unappropriated Federal 
     land shall be substantially equal; or
       (2) subject to subsection (c), if the overall value of the 
     parcels is not equal, the party conveying the parcel of 
     lesser value shall--
       (A) equalize the value by the payment of funds to the other 
     party; or
       (B) enter the imbalance in value on a ledger account in 
     accordance with subsection (e).
       (b) Appraisal Required.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in subsection (d), the 
     value of the unappropriated Federal land selected in 
     accordance with this Act and the value of a State land grant 
     parcel conveyed under this Act shall be determined by 
     appraisals conducted by 1 or more independent appraisers 
     selected jointly by the Secretary and the State.
       (2) Requirements.--An appraisal under paragraph (1) shall 
     be completed in accordance with--
       (A) the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land 
     Acquisitions; or
       (B) subject to subsection (d)(1), the Uniform Standards for 
     Professional Appraisal Practice.
       (c) Equalization.--With respect to a conveyance to the 
     Secretary of a State land grant parcel of lesser value than 
     the parcel of unappropriated Federal land to be conveyed to 
     the State under this Act, the total value of the equalization 
     payment described in subsection (a)(2)(A) or the ledger entry 
     described in subsection (e), as applicable, may not exceed 25 
     percent of the total value of the parcel of unappropriated 
     Federal land.
       (d) Low Value Parcels.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary, with the consent of the 
     State, may use mass appraisals, a summary appraisal, or a 
     statement of value made by a qualified appraiser carried out 
     in accordance with the Uniform Standards for Professional 
     Appraisal Practice to determine the value of a State land 
     grant parcel or a parcel of unappropriated Federal land to be 
     conveyed under this Act instead of an appraisal that complies 
     with the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land 
     Acquisitions if the State and the Secretary agree that market 
     value of the State land grant parcel or parcel of 
     unappropriated Federal land, as applicable, is--
       (A) less than $500,000; and
       (B) less than $500 per acre.
       (2) Division.--A State land grant parcel or a parcel of 
     unappropriated Federal land may not be artificially divided 
     in order to qualify for a summary appraisal, mass appraisal, 
     or statement of value under paragraph (1).
       (e) Ledger Accounts.--
       (1) In general.--With respect to a State land grant parcel 
     conveyed under this Act in consideration for a parcel of 
     unappropriated Federal land, if the overall value of the 
     parcels is not equal, the Secretary and the State may agree 
     to use a ledger account to make equal the value.
       (2) Imbalances.--A ledger account described in paragraph 
     (1) shall reflect imbalances in value to be reconciled in a 
     subsequent transaction.
       (3) Account balancing.--Each ledger account described in 
     paragraph (1) shall be--
       (A) balanced not later than 3 years after the date on which 
     the ledger account is established; and
       (B) closed not later than 5 years after the date of the 
     last conveyance of land under this Act.
       (4) Costs.--
       (A) In general.--The Secretary or the State may assume 
     costs or other responsibilities or requirements for conveying 
     land under this Act that ordinarily are borne by the other 
     party.
       (B) Adjustment.--If the Secretary or the State assume costs 
     or other responsibilities under subparagraph (A), the 
     Secretary or the State shall make adjustments to the value of 
     the unappropriated Federal land conveyed to the State to 
     compensate the Secretary or the State, as applicable, for 
     assuming the costs or other responsibilities.
       (5) Mineral land.--If value is attributed to any parcel of 
     unappropriated Federal land that has been selected by the 
     State because of the presence of minerals under a lease 
     entered into under the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et 
     seq.) that is in a producing or producible status, and the 
     lease is to be conveyed under this Act, the value of the 
     parcel shall be reduced by the amount that represents the 
     likely Federal revenue sharing obligation under the Mineral 
     Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.) with the State, but the 
     adjustment shall not be considered as reflecting a property 
     right of the State.
       (6) Public inspection and notice.--
       (A) Public inspection.--Not later than 30 days before the 
     date of any exchange of Federal land and non-Federal land 
     under this act, all final appraisals and appraisal reviews 
     for the land to be exchanged shall be available for public 
     review at the office of the State Director of the Bureau of 
     Land Management in the Montana-Dakotas State Office.
       (B) Notice.--The Secretary shall make available on the 
     public website of the Secretary, and the Secretary or the 
     State, as applicable, shall publish in a newspaper of general 
     circulation in North Dakota, a notice that the appraisals 
     conducted under subsection (b) are available for public 
     inspection.

     SEC. 5. MISCELLANEOUS.

       (a) In General.--Land or minerals conveyed under this Act 
     shall be subject to all applicable Federal, State, and Tribal 
     law.
       (b) Protection of Indian Rights.--
       (1) Treaty rights.--Nothing in this Act modifies, limits, 
     expands, or otherwise affects any treaty-reserved right or 
     other right of any Indian Tribe recognized by any other 
     means, including treaties or agreements with the United 
     States, Executive orders, statutes, regulations, or case law.
       (2) Land or minerals held in trust.--Nothing in this Act 
     affects--
       (A) land or minerals held in trust by the United States as 
     of the date of enactment of this Act on behalf of, and for 
     the benefit of, any Indian Tribe; or
       (B) any individual Indian allotment.
       (c) Hazardous Materials.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary and the State shall make 
     available for review and inspection any record relating to 
     hazardous materials on land to be conveyed under this Act.
       (2) Certification.--
       (A) In general.--Prior to completing a conveyance of 
     unappropriated Federal land under this Act, the Secretary 
     shall complete an inspection and a hazardous materials 
     certification of the land to be conveyed.
       (B) State land grant parcels.--Prior to completing a 
     conveyance of a State land grant parcel under this Act, the 
     State shall complete an inspection and a hazardous materials 
     certification of the land to be conveyed.
       (d) Grazing Permits.--
       (1) In general.--If land conveyed under this Act is subject 
     to a lease, permit, or contract for the grazing of domestic 
     livestock in effect on the date of the conveyance, the 
     Secretary or the State, as applicable, shall allow the 
     grazing to continue for the remainder of the term of the 
     lease, permit, or contract, subject to the related terms and 
     conditions of the user agreements, including permitted 
     stocking rates, grazing fee levels, access, and ownership and 
     use of range improvements.
       (2) Cancellation.--
       (A) In general.--Nothing in this Act prevents the Secretary 
     or the State from canceling or modifying a grazing permit, 
     lease, or contract if the land subject to the permit, lease, 
     or contract is sold, conveyed, transferred, or leased for 
     nongrazing purposes.
       (B) Base properties.--If land conveyed by the State under 
     this Act is used by a grazing permittee or lessee to meet the 
     base property requirements for a Federal grazing permit or 
     lease, the land shall continue to qualify as a base property 
     for the remaining term of the lease or permit and the term of 
     any renewal or extension of the lease or permit.
       (C) Range improvements.--Nothing in this Act prohibits a 
     holder of a grazing lease, permit, or contract from being 
     compensated for range

[[Page H3569]]

     improvements pursuant to the terms of the lease, permit, or 
     contract under existing Federal or State laws.

     SEC. 6. SAVINGS CLAUSE.

       Nothing in this Act applies to or affects litigation or 
     disputes pending on the date of enactment of this Act 
     regarding the ownership of any land or mineral resources 
     located within the State of North Dakota.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Arkansas (Mr. Westerman) and the gentlewoman from Maryland (Ms. 
Elfreth) each will control 20 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 to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous material on H.R. 2252, the bill now under 
consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Arkansas?
  There was no objection.

                              {time}  1540

  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2252, the North Dakota 
Trust Lands Completion Act of 2026, introduced by the gentlewoman from 
North Dakota (Mrs. Fedorchak).
  This bill addresses a land management issue that dates back to North 
Dakota's admission to the Union. At statehood, Congress granted lands 
to North Dakota to help support public institutions, including schools 
and universities, through responsible land and resource management. For 
more than a century, the State has used those lands to generate revenue 
for education and for other public purposes.
  Today, North Dakota continues to manage hundreds of thousands of 
acres of surface estate and millions of acres of mineral estate known 
as State trust lands. However, approximately 31,000 of these surface 
acres and roughly 130,000 acres of the State trust minerals are located 
within the boundaries of Tribal reservations. This has created 
overlapping jurisdictional challenges and fragmented, checkerboard 
ownership patterns that are burdensome to all parties. Furthermore, 
these stranded State trust lands are unable to generate revenue for the 
benefit of North Dakota's citizens and public schoolchildren.
  H.R. 2252 provides a better path forward that is a win-win for 
everyone involved. The bill allows North Dakota to relinquish certain 
trust lands located within reservation boundaries and select equal-
value Bureau of Land Management lands elsewhere in the State that they 
can utilize to generate millions of dollars in new revenue.
  In return, the relinquished lands from the State within reservation 
boundaries will be taken into trust for the benefit of North Dakota's 
Tribes. Importantly, this legislation protects taxpayers by requiring 
independent appraisals, equal-value exchanges, and protection for valid 
existing rights.
  This logical fix helps North Dakotans better manage their trust land, 
provides long-term funding for education, supports Tribes, and 
consolidates fragmented land ownership to reduce the burden on Federal 
land management agencies. This is truly a win-win across the board.
  I commend the leadership of Representative Fedorchak in advancing 
this bill. I also commend Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum, who 
has supported this legislation since his time as North Dakota's 
Governor.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2252, and I reserve 
the balance of my time.
  Ms. ELFRETH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2252 would allow the State of North Dakota to 
relinquish parcels of State land within the boundaries of a Tribal 
reservation in exchange for one or more parcels of unappropriated 
Bureau of Land Management land of substantially equivalent value.
  All relinquished State lands will be held in trust by the Secretary 
of the Interior on behalf of the Tribe whose reservation includes those 
lands.
  The process established by this legislation will help make 
reservations whole and fulfill obligations made to the State of North 
Dakota when it was entered into the Union in 1889.
  The chair mentioned a win-win, and I want to reemphasize that here. 
This bill will help fulfill our Tribal treaty responsibilities and will 
benefit North Dakota schools, with the land acquired managed as school 
trust lands.
  I commend and thank my friend, Representative Fedorchak, for her work 
on this bill, which includes updates to ensure that the land exchanges 
are transparent and fair.
  The bill also includes important safeguards for land with wilderness 
characteristics and other important conservation designations. Most 
importantly, Mr. Speaker, this bill is supported by the impacted 
Tribes, including the Spirit Lake Tribe and the Standing Rock Sioux 
Tribe.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill. I reserve 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to 
the gentlewoman from North Dakota (Mrs. Fedorchak), the lead sponsor of 
the bill.
  Mrs. FEDORCHAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my bill, the 
North Dakota Trust Lands Completion Act. I thank the gentlewoman from 
Maryland and our chairman for his leadership, especially for getting it 
through the House Natural Resources Committee with unanimous support. I 
can't thank him enough for that.
  As both have stated, this bill provides some important new changes 
for my State and addresses a unique land management challenge that 
dates back to North Dakota's statehood. They have both expressed it 
well, but let me reinforce what has already been said.
  When North Dakota became a State, the Federal Government granted 2.6 
million acres of Federal land to support schools and other public 
needs. Specifically, the State received sections 16 and 36 of every 
township. As a result, North Dakota holds more than 31,000 surface 
acres and 130,000 acres of mineral rights inside Tribal reservation 
boundaries.
  This created a checkerboard pattern of ownership that makes land 
management and development difficult for everyone. The chart beside me 
shows the patchwork of State trust land on the Standing Rock 
Reservation. All the green land, green checks, squares, in this are 
land owned within the Tribal reservation by the State of North Dakota. 
This is just one of five reservations in our State.
  The Tribes struggle to efficiently develop land within their own 
reservation boundaries because of this fragmented ownership, and there 
is currently no pathway for the State and Federal government to 
exchange these lands.
  My legislation solves this problem. H.R. 2252 authorizes equal-value 
land exchanges between the State of North Dakota and the Department of 
the Interior. This allows the State to exchange scattered trust lands 
within reservation boundaries like this for Federal lands of equivalent 
values elsewhere in the State.

  Importantly, this bill does not automatically exchange a single acre 
of land. It simply creates a process that can be used if all parties 
choose to move forward.
  The legislation includes multiple safeguards and transparency 
requirements; specifically, consultation with affected Tribal 
Governments prior to any conveyance, environmental review authority for 
the Secretary of the Interior, independent appraisals using Federal 
appraisal standards to ensure substantially equal value, public 
inspection of final appraisals at least 30 days before any exchange, 
and public notice online and in North Dakota newspapers before 
exchanges occur.
  Upon exchange, State land located within reservation boundaries is 
immediately transferred to the BIA to be held in trust for the benefit 
of the Tribe. The State will manage the exchanged Federal acres for 
North Dakotans and public schools. The result is less fragmentation, 
clear ownership boundaries, and a greater ability for both Tribal and 
State governments to manage the land for the benefit of their people.
  Mr. Speaker, I also want to be clear about what this bill does not 
do. This bill does not reduce public access. It does not close hunting 
land. It does not impact recreation. Existing grazing permits and 
leases are protected throughout the exchange process, and

[[Page H3570]]

every exchange must meet rigorous Federal appraisal standards to ensure 
equal value.
  The bill also includes significant protections for wildlife habitat, 
conservation lands, public access, and existing land uses. Federal 
lands specifically excluded include: areas of critical environmental 
concern, National Landscape Conservation System lands, research natural 
areas, military reservations, and lands designated for conservation 
purposes by Congress or the President.
  Protected conservation areas and specially managed wildlife 
landscapes are not eligible for exchange under this legislation.
  To be absolutely clear, the bill explicitly preserves all Indian 
treaty rights. In fact, this bill was shaped in consultation with 
Tribal leaders. It has strong support from Tribal nations in North 
Dakota.
  Steve Sitting Bear is chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. He 
has plans to grow beef and bison production for Standing Rock, and what 
a great opportunity that is. They reside on the rolling prairies along 
the Missouri River in southwestern North Dakota, perfect for grazing 
cattle and bison.
  This legislation would help correct this scattered ownership pattern 
that challenges Chairman Sitting Bear's vision. In his words, the 
current situation has made effective land management difficult for all 
parties.
  Mark Fox, who is chairman of the Three Affiliated Tribes, says his 
nation was glad to help shape the legislation and supports restoring 
reservation land while preserving treaty rights.
  Due to this collaboration and broad support, this legislation passed 
the United States Senate unanimously in the last Congress. It passed 
unanimously out of the House Committee on Natural Resources earlier 
this year.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a practical, commonsense solution that benefits 
Tribes, benefits North Dakota, and improves land management for future 
generations. I urge my colleagues to support the North Dakota Trust 
Lands Completion Act.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I again commend the gentlewoman for this legislation and thank my 
colleagues in the minority for helping us work on something that we 
could bring to the floor that is a commonsense bill that benefits all 
those involved. I think this is a good example of Congress doing what 
we should do, bringing forth commonsense legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time. I am prepared to 
close and reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. ELFRETH. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this 
legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, again, H.R. 2252 is a practical and balanced approach to 
resolving a longstanding land management challenge in North Dakota. 
This legislation helps the State better manage trust lands that support 
schools and public institutions while also creating a pathway for 
greater Tribal land consolidation within reservation boundaries.
  I thank Representative Fedorchak for her leadership on this issue. I 
urge my colleagues to support the bill, and I yield back the balance of 
my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 2252, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________