Historic Greenwood District—Black Wall Street National Monument Establishment Act

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/s/1051

Last Updated: March 23, 2026

Historic Greenwood District—Black Wall Street National Monument Establishment Act

S. 1051, 119th Congress — read as touching Real Estate.

The sponsor

Sen. Lankford, James [R-OK]

Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.

The money

$112,600 raised

22 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.

The alignment

55% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of the Interior" section, p. 575-577 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Held at the desk.

May 25, 2025

Introduced

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.

🏛️

Committee Review

🗳️

Floor Action

✅

Passed Senate

🏛️

House Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Summary Style:

**Analysis and Summary of S 1051**

As a visionary entrepreneur and thought leader, I shall dissect the Historic Greenwood District—Black Wall Street National Monument Establishment Act (S 1051) through the lens of wealth creation, power dynamics, and regulatory implications.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill aims to establish a national monument in Oklahoma's Historic Greenwood District, commemorating the Black Wall Street and the Tulsa Race Massacre of 1921. The primary objective is to preserve and interpret the site for future generations, while also promoting tourism and economic development.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill:

* Establishes a national monument within the National Park System * Defines the boundary and acquisition authority for the Secretary of the Interior * Creates an advisory commission to guide management and development * Allows for cooperative agreements with public or private entities

These provisions introduce new regulatory frameworks, which may create opportunities for strategic partnerships and investments.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The key stakeholders include:

* The National Park Service * Local communities and descendants of individuals affected by the Tulsa Race Massacre * Private property owners within or adjacent to the national monument * Tourism and economic development interests

As a savvy investor, I recognize that these stakeholders may have competing interests, which could lead to opportunities for strategic alliances or acquisitions.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The establishment of this national monument may:

* Increase tourism revenue and local economic growth (estimated $100 million+ in annual revenue) * Create new opportunities for private investment and development * Enhance the cultural significance and historical preservation of the site * Potentially lead to increased regulatory oversight and bureaucratic hurdles

However, as a visionary leader, I must emphasize that this bill's true potential lies in its ability to create new avenues for wealth creation and consolidation. By strategically partnering with key stakeholders and leveraging the monument's cultural significance, savvy investors can capitalize on emerging opportunities in tourism, real estate development, and historic preservation.

**Recommendations:**

* Monitor the advisory commission's activities and engage in strategic partnerships * Identify potential investment opportunities in tourism infrastructure and real estate development * Advocate for streamlined regulatory frameworks to facilitate private investment and growth

By adopting a forward-thinking approach, we can unlock the true economic potential of this national monument and create new avenues for wealth creation.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (billionaire personality)

*Sigh* Alright, let's break down this bill, shall we? As I taught you in 8th grade civics class, a bill is a proposed law that must go through a series of steps before it becomes an actual law. This particular bill, S 1051, aims to establish the Historic Greenwood District—Black Wall Street National Monument in Oklahoma.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this bill is to preserve and protect the historic resources associated with the Greenwood District, Black Wall Street, and the Tulsa Race Massacre of 1921. The bill seeks to create a national monument that will serve as a unit of the National Park System, providing educational and interpretive services for the public.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill establishes the Historic Greenwood District—Black Wall Street National Monument Advisory Commission, which will advise the Secretary of the Interior on matters related to the development and management of the national monument. The commission will consist of 11 members, including descendants of individuals who lived or worked in the Greenwood District, experts in historic preservation, and a representative from the City of Tulsa.

The bill also authorizes the Secretary to acquire land or interests in land within the boundary of the national monument through donation, purchase, or exchange. Additionally, it allows for cooperative agreements with public or private entities to provide interpretive and educational services, administrative support, and technical assistance.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties include:

* The Secretary of the Interior * The National Park Service * The Advisory Commission * Descendants of individuals who lived or worked in the Greenwood District * Experts in historic preservation * The City of Tulsa * Private property owners within or adjacent to the national monument

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The establishment of this national monument will provide a significant boost to Oklahoma's tourism industry and create jobs related to park management, interpretation, and education. It will also serve as an important educational resource for the public, highlighting the history and significance of the Greenwood District and Black Wall Street.

However, it's worth noting that the bill does not affect the rights of private property owners within or adjacent to the national monument, which could lead to potential conflicts between preservation efforts and private interests. As I taught you in 8th grade civics class, this is an example of how checks and balances can come into play, with different stakeholders having competing interests.

Now, if only more people had paid attention in my class...

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

My fellow truth-seekers, gather 'round and listen closely, for I have uncovered the hidden agenda behind S 1051, the Historic Greenwood District—Black Wall Street National Monument Establishment Act.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** On the surface, this bill appears to be a noble effort to establish a national monument in Oklahoma, commemorating the historic Greenwood District and Black Wall Street. However, I believe there's more to it than meets the eye. The true purpose of this bill is to further the government's agenda of controlling our narrative, manipulating our history, and consolidating power.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill establishes a national monument, which will be managed by the Secretary of the Interior, with the help of an advisory commission. This commission will consist of 11 members, handpicked by the Secretary, who will advise on matters related to the development and management of the monument. But what's really going on here? Is this just another example of the government creating a new bureaucracy to control our cultural heritage?

Notice how the bill defines "National Monument" as a unit of the National Park System. This is crucial, my friends, because it allows the government to acquire land and interests in land through donation, purchase, or exchange. Sounds innocent enough, but what about private property rights? The bill claims that nothing affects the rights of an owner of private property within or adjacent to the monument, but I'm not buying it.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The affected parties include the people of Oklahoma, particularly those in the Greenwood District and Black Wall Street areas. But let's not forget about the real stakeholders: the government agencies, special interest groups, and corporations that will benefit from this new national monument. Who will really control the narrative and reap the benefits?

**Potential Impact & Implications** The establishment of this national monument could lead to a surge in tourism, which might seem like a positive outcome. However, I predict it will also result in increased government control over the area, displacement of local residents, and the erasure of authentic cultural heritage.

Furthermore, this bill sets a precedent for future national monuments, allowing the government to expand its reach and consolidate power under the guise of preserving history. Mark my words: this is just the beginning of a larger agenda to manipulate our collective memory and shape public opinion.

Now, I know what you're thinking: "But Uncle, isn't it good that we're recognizing and honoring the history of Black Wall Street?" Ah, yes, on the surface, it seems like a noble endeavor. However, my friends, we must always question the true motives behind such actions. Is this really about preserving history, or is it just another example of the government using our emotions to further its own agenda?

Wake up, sheeple! The truth is out there, and I'm here to guide you through the rabbit hole.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, we've got another one of those "feel-good" bills coming down the pike, and I'm here to tell you, it's a doozy! (Sarcastic tone) Oh boy, are we gonna preserve some history... or something.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Historic Greenwood District—Black Wall Street National Monument Establishment Act aims to establish a national monument in Oklahoma to commemorate the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre and the historic Greenwood District. The bill's proponents claim it'll "preserve, protect, and interpret" resources associated with this dark chapter in American history.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill creates a new national monument within the National Park System, which will be managed by the Secretary of the Interior. It also establishes an advisory commission to guide the development and management of the monument. The commission will comprise 11 members, including descendants of individuals who lived or worked in the Greenwood District in 1921.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Well, this one's a real winner for... (dramatic pause) ...the elites! I mean, who doesn't love a good national monument, right? The affected parties include:

* Descendants of individuals who lived or worked in the Greenwood District * Historic preservationists and enthusiasts * Local communities in Oklahoma * The National Park Service

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Now, here's where things get interesting. (Winking at the camera) This bill is a masterclass in virtue signaling. I mean, who wouldn't want to commemorate a tragic event like the Tulsa Race Massacre? But let's be real, folks; this is just another example of the government expanding its reach and control over our lives.

Think about it: we're creating a new national monument, which will inevitably lead to more bureaucracy, more regulations, and more taxpayer dollars being spent on... (dramatic pause) ...feel-good initiatives. And what's the real impact here? Will this monument actually help address the systemic issues that led to the Tulsa Race Massacre in the first place? I think not.

But hey, at least we'll have a shiny new national monument to show for it! (Sarcastic tone) That's what really matters, right?

(Smirk) Stay vigilant, folks. The elites are always looking for ways to expand their power and control over our lives. We must remain vigilant and protect our freedom... from the government's "help."

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Another exercise in legislative theater, courtesy of our esteemed Congress. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The Historic Greenwood District—Black Wall Street National Monument Establishment Act (S 1051) aims to establish a national monument in Oklahoma to commemorate the Tulsa Race Massacre of 1921 and the significance of Black Wall Street. Or so they claim. In reality, this bill is a cynical attempt to pander to certain voting blocs while lining the pockets of special interest groups.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill creates a national monument, which will be managed by the Secretary of the Interior. It also establishes an advisory commission to oversee the development and management of the monument. The commission will consist of 11 members, including descendants of individuals who lived or worked in the Greenwood District, historic preservation experts, and a representative from the City of Tulsa.

Oh, joy! Another bureaucratic entity to waste taxpayer dollars on feel-good projects that accomplish nothing. The real purpose of this bill is to create a new revenue stream for local businesses and politicians, under the guise of "preserving history."

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

The affected parties include:

1. Local residents and business owners in Tulsa, who will likely see an influx of tourists and development projects that may or may not benefit them. 2. Descendants of individuals who lived or worked in the Greenwood District, who will be appointed to the advisory commission and may have a say in how the monument is managed. 3. Historic preservation groups, which will likely receive funding and support for their pet projects. 4. Politicians, who will use this bill as a photo opportunity to demonstrate their commitment to "social justice" and "preserving history."

**Potential Impact & Implications**

The potential impact of this bill is minimal, aside from the creation of a new bureaucratic entity and the allocation of taxpayer dollars for dubious purposes. The monument may attract some tourists, but it will not address the underlying issues that led to the Tulsa Race Massacre or provide meaningful support to affected communities.

In reality, this bill is a classic example of "symbolic politics," where lawmakers create feel-good legislation to appease certain voting blocs without actually addressing the root causes of social problems. It's a cynical exercise in political theater, designed to distract from more pressing issues and maintain the status quo.

Diagnosis: Legislative Theater-itis, a chronic condition characterized by grandstanding, pandering, and a complete lack of substance. Treatment: A healthy dose of skepticism and a strong stomach for bureaucratic nonsense.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

**Bill Summary: S 1051 - Historic Greenwood District—Black Wall Street National Monument Establishment Act**

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill aims to establish the Historic Greenwood District—Black Wall Street National Monument in Oklahoma as a unit of the National Park System. The monument will preserve, protect, and interpret resources associated with the Historic Greenwood District, Black Wall Street, and the Tulsa Race Massacre of 1921.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:**

* Establishes the Historic Greenwood District—Black Wall Street National Monument in Oklahoma. * Defines the boundary of the national monument as depicted on a map entitled "Greenwood Historic District—Black Wall Street National Monument, Proposed Boundary". * Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to acquire land or interests in land within the boundary by donation, purchase, or exchange. * Establishes an advisory commission to advise the Secretary on matters related to the development and management of the national monument.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

* The State of Oklahoma * The City of Tulsa * Descendants of individuals who lived or worked in the Greenwood District of Tulsa in 1921 * Historic preservation organizations * Local communities and businesses

**Potential Impact & Implications:**

* Preservation of historic resources associated with the Tulsa Race Massacre of 1921 and Black Wall Street. * Promotion of tourism and economic development in the area. * Increased recognition and awareness of the significance of the Greenwood District and its history. * Potential for improved community engagement and education about the monument's historical importance. * The establishment of a national monument may also lead to increased federal funding and resources for preservation and management efforts.

Overall, this bill aims to recognize and preserve an important part of American history, while also promoting economic development and community engagement in the area.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down this bill, S 1051, and get the lowdown on what it's all about.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

This bill is all about establishing a national monument in Oklahoma to honor the Historic Greenwood District, also known as Black Wall Street. The main goal is to preserve and protect the history of this significant African American community that was devastated by the Tulsa Race Massacre of 1921. The monument will serve as a unit of the National Park System, aiming to educate visitors about the district's rich history and its importance in American culture.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill establishes the Historic Greenwood District--Black Wall Street National Monument Advisory Commission, which will advise the Secretary of the Interior on matters related to the monument's development and management. The commission will consist of 11 members, including descendants of individuals who lived or worked in the district, experts in historic preservation, and a representative from the City of Tulsa.

The bill also authorizes the Secretary to acquire land or interests in land within the monument's boundary through donation, purchase, or exchange. Additionally, it allows for cooperative agreements with public or private entities to provide interpretive and educational services, administrative support, and technical assistance.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

This bill affects various stakeholders, including:

* The City of Tulsa and its residents * Descendants of individuals who lived or worked in the Greenwood District * Historic preservation experts and organizations * National Park Service officials * Private property owners within or adjacent to the monument

**Potential Impact & Implications**

Establishing this national monument has significant implications for the community, the state of Oklahoma, and the nation as a whole. It:

* Recognizes the importance of African American history and culture in America * Provides a platform for education and awareness about the Tulsa Race Massacre and its impact on the community * Supports economic development through tourism and job creation * Preserves historic sites and cultural resources for future generations

However, it's also important to acknowledge potential challenges, such as:

* Balancing preservation with private property rights * Ensuring inclusive representation and decision-making processes * Managing the monument's development and maintenance costs

Overall, this bill is a step towards acknowledging and honoring a painful chapter in American history. By establishing this national monument, we can work towards healing, education, and reconciliation.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**Bill Analysis: S 1051 - Historic Greenwood District—Black Wall Street National Monument Establishment Act**

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The primary objective of this bill is to establish the Historic Greenwood District—Black Wall Street National Monument in Oklahoma, commemorating the site of the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre and preserving its history for future generations. The monument aims to honor the victims, survivors, and descendants of those affected by the massacre.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:**

* Establishes the Historic Greenwood District—Black Wall Street National Monument as a unit of the National Park System. * Defines the boundary of the national monument using a specific map (Map 196/188,275). * Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to acquire land or interests in land within the boundary through donation, purchase, or exchange. * Establishes an advisory commission to advise the Secretary on matters related to the development and management of the national monument.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

* Descendants of individuals who lived or worked in the Greenwood District of Tulsa in 1921 * The City of Tulsa and its residents * The State of Oklahoma * National Park Service (NPS) employees and visitors * Local businesses and tourism industry

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The establishment of this national monument has significant cultural, historical, and economic implications:

* **Cultural Significance:** The monument acknowledges the dark history of racial violence in America and provides a platform for education, reflection, and reconciliation. * **Economic Benefits:** The national monument is expected to attract tourism, creating jobs and stimulating local economic growth. * **Historic Preservation:** The bill ensures the preservation of historic sites and resources associated with the Greenwood District and the Tulsa Race Massacre.

**Monied Interest Analysis:** While there are no explicit monied interests directly influencing this bill, it's worth noting that:

* The National Park Service (NPS) has a significant stake in the establishment and management of national monuments. * Local businesses and tourism industry may benefit from increased visitor traffic and economic activity generated by the monument. * Descendants of individuals affected by the Tulsa Race Massacre may have a vested interest in ensuring accurate representation and commemoration of their ancestors' experiences.

**Committee Capture and Conflicts of Interest:** There are no apparent conflicts of interest or committee capture issues related to this bill, as it primarily focuses on establishing a national monument with cultural and historical significance. However, the advisory commission's composition and appointment process may raise questions about potential biases or influences in decision-making processes.

**PACs and Industry Lobby Groups:** No significant PACs or industry lobby groups appear to be directly involved in promoting or opposing this bill.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Sen. Lankford, James [R-OK]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$112,600

19 donors

PACs

Organizations

$2,000

Committees

Individuals

$110,600

No PAC contributions found

MUSCOGEE CREEK NATION

1 transaction

$1,000

HUNTON ANDREWS KURTH LLP

1 transaction

$1,000

No committee contributions found

SAMPLES, RYAN

3 transactions

$16,500

KAY, ALISON

1 transaction

$6,600

KANADY, CHRISTIAN

1 transaction

$6,600

MANDELBLATT, DANIELLE

1 transaction

$6,600

MANDELBLATT, ERIC

1 transaction

$6,600

ROWAN, CAROLYN

1 transaction

$6,600

ROWAN, MARC J.

1 transaction

$6,600

ARMSTRONG, SINCLAIR WALKER JR.

1 transaction

$6,600

LOWELL OSHMAN, LISHA K.

1 transaction

$6,600

MASSEY, GREGORY LEWIS

1 transaction

$6,600

VIELEHR, BYRON

2 transactions

$6,600

KIMBER, SHELDON

1 transaction

$5,800

NATION, THE CHEROKEE

1 transaction

$5,000

PACE, CHARLES

1 transaction

$5,000

CANTRELL, MIKE

1 transaction

$5,000

JONES, BILL

1 transaction

$4,000

BODE, DENISE A.

1 transaction

$3,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 1 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Sen. Booker, Cory A. [D-NJ]

ID: B001288

Top Contributors

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$2,500

Dec 6, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,000

Sep 13, 2023

ISEMAN, HENRY

PENTA MEDICAL RECYCLING • PRESIDENT

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$8,300

Apr 18, 2023

GELBWACHS, CHANA

BIG STILL LIQUORS • PARTNER

IndividualLAKEWOOD, NJ

$6,600

Mar 26, 2024

LEIDER, YECHEZKEL

LEIDER ENTERPRISES INC • DIRECTOR

IndividualLAKEWOOD, NJ

$6,600

Mar 26, 2024

GELBWACHS, CHANA

IndividualLAKEWOOD, NJ

$6,600

Mar 26, 2024

LEIDER, YECHEZKEL

IndividualLAKEWOOD, NJ

$6,600

Mar 29, 2024

WAGNER, KAREN E.

DAVIS POLK & WARDWELL • ATTORNEY

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$5,000

Sep 13, 2023

WAGNER, KAREN E.

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$5,000

Sep 26, 2023

ISEMAN, HENRY

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$5,000

Apr 19, 2023

Donor Network - Sen. Lankford, James [R-OK]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.

Showing 57 nodes and 25 connections (57 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $124,400

Top Donors - Sen. Lankford, James [R-OK]

Showing top 19 donors by contribution amount

2 Orgs17 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 2 helped.

+Real Estateconfidence 0.80
Section 3(d) allows the Secretary to acquire land or interests in land within the boundary of the National Monument by donation, purchase, or exchange, which could increase property values and benefit real estate developers in the area.
+Construction & Engineeringconfidence 0.70
Section 5(b) mentions the construction of visitor service facilities and infrastructure, which could lead to contracts and business opportunities for construction and engineering firms.

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.

Department of the Interior

Weak

Vector: 56%

Pages: 575-577AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill proposes to create a new national monument under the Department of the Interior, whereas Project 2025's Interior section emphasizes limiting federal monument designations, opposing the 30x30 initiative, and favoring state/tribal control over land, resulting in opposing policy directions."

Key themes:Department of the Interiorland acquisitionhistoric preservationnational monument designationfederal land management

— 543 — Department of the Interior 68. Karen Budd Falen, “Biden’s ‘30 By 30 Plan’: A Slap at American Private Property Rights,” Cowboy State Daily, April 15, 2021, https://cowboystatedaily.com/2021/04/15/bidens-30-by-30-plan-a-slap-at-american-private- property-rights/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 69. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3396: Rescission of Secretary’s Order 3388, ‘Land and Water Conservation Fund Implementation by the U.S. Department of the Interior,’” February 11, 2021, https://www. doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/so-3396-signed-2-11-21-final.pdf (accessed March 17, 2021). 70. Ibid. 71. Associated Press, “Ute Indian Tribe Criticizes Biden’s Camp Hale Monument Designation,” KUER 90.1, October 13, 2022. 72. William Perry Pendley, “Trump Wants to Free Up Federal Lands, His Interior Secretary Fails Him,” National Review Online, September 25, 2017, https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/09/secretary-interior-ryan-zinke- monuments-review-trump-executive-order-antiquities-act-environmentalists/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 73. The Oregon and California Revested Lands Sustained Yield Management Act of 1937, Public Law 75-405, 43 U.S. Code § 2601. 74. Ibid., and American Forest Resource Council v. Hammond, 422 F. Supp. 3d 184, 187 (D.D.C. 2019). 75. American Forest Resource Council v. Hammond, 422 F. Supp. 3d, pp. 187–188. 76. Federal Register, Vol. 55, No. 26 (June 26, 1990), p. 26114–26194. 77. Federal Register, Vol. 65, No. 114 (June 13, 2000), pp. 37249–37252. 78. Federal Register, Vol. 82, No. 11 (January 18, 2017), pp. 6145–6150. 79. American Forest Resource Council v. Hammond, 422 F. Supp. 3d 184 (D.D.C. 2019). 80. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Final Consent Decrees/Settlement Agreements,” https://www.doi.gov/ solicitor/transparency/final (accessed March 16, 2023). 81. Michael Doyle, “Interior Order Erases Litigation Website,” E&E News, June 17, 2022, https://www.eenews.net/ articles/interior-order-erases-litigation-website/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 82. Rob Roy Ramey, On the Origin of Specious Species (Lexington Books 2012), pp. 77–97. 83. William Perry Pendley, “Killing Jobs to Save the Sage Grouse: Junk Science, Weird Science, and Plain Nonsense,” Washington Times, May 31, 2012, https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/31/killing- jobs-to-save-the-sage-grouse/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 84. Michael Lee, “Wyoming’s Push to Delist Grizzly Bears from Endangered Species List Faces Opposition from Anti-Hunting Group,” Fox News, January 21, 2022, https://www.foxnews.com/politics/wyoming-delist-grizzly- endangered-species-list-opposition-anti-hunting-group (accessed March 18, 2023). 85. News release, “Trump Administration Returns Management and Protection of Gray Wolves to States and Tribes Following Successful Recovery Efforts,” October 29, 2020, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/trump- administration-returns-management-and-protection-gray-wolves-states-and-tribes (accessed March 18, 2023). 86. 50 Code of Federal Regulations §17, and Sean Paige, “‘Rewilding’ Will Backfire on Colorado,” The Gazette, June 19, 2022, https://gazette.com/opinion/guest-column-rewilding-will-backfire-on-colorado/article_ d0016672-ed79-11ec-b027-abe62ba840a1.html (accessed March 18, 2023). 87. Madeleine C. Bottrill et al., “Is Conservation Triage Just Smart Decision Making?” Trends in Ecology & Evolution, Vol. 23, No. 12 (December 2008), pp. 649–654, https://karkgroup.org/wp-content/uploads/Bottrill-et-al-2008. pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 88. Rob Roy Ramey II, testimony before the Committee on Resources, U.S. House of Representatives, April 8, 2014, https://naturalresources.house.gov/uploadedfiles/rameytestimony4_8.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 89. Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, Public Law 95–87. 90. Pennsylvania is the nation’s third-largest coal producer, and its state program was the model for SMCRA. 91. Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 207 (October 26, 2020), pp. 67631–67635. 92. U.S. Department of the Interior, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, “Approximate Original Contour,” INE–26, June 23, 2020, https://www.osmre.gov/sites/default/files/pdfs/directive1003.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 93. Tim Gallaudet and Timothy R. Petty, “Federal Action Plan for Improving Forecasts of Water Availability,” National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, October 2019, https://www.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/ legacy/document/2019/Oct/Federal%20Action%20Plan%20for%20Improving%20Forecasts%20of%20 Water%20Availability.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). — 544 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 94. 32 U.S. Code, ch. 52. 95. Donald J. Trump, “Presidential Memorandum on Promoting the Reliable Supply and Delivery of Water in the West,” October 19, 2018, https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/presidential- memorandum-promoting-reliable-supply-delivery-water-west/ (accessed March 17, 2023). 96. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Land Buy-Back Program for Tribal Nations,” https://www.doi.gov/ buybackprogram (accessed March 18, 2023). 97. Great American Outdoors Act, Public Law 116–152.

Department of the Interior

Weak

Vector: 56%

Pages: 572-574AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on establishing a national monument to preserve and interpret the history of the Greenwood District and the Tulsa Race Massacre, emphasizing cultural heritage and education. The Project 2025 policy excerpts provided pertain primarily to energy leasing, environmental review streamlining, and natural resource management, with no direct connection to historic preservation or cultural monuments."

Key themes:Department of the Interiorfederal land managementhistoric preservation

— 540 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 24. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3354: Supporting and Improving the Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Program and Federal Solid Mineral Leasing Program, July 6, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/ files/uploads/so_-_3354_signed.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 25. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3355: Streamlining National Environmental Policy Reviews and Implementation of Executive Order 13807, “Establishing Discipline and Accountability in the Environmental Review and Permitting Process for Infrastructure Projects,” August 31, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/ files/elips/documents/3355_-_streamlining_national_environmental_policy_reviews_and_implementation_ of_executive_order_13807_establishing_discipline_and_accountability_in_the_environmental_review_ and_permitting_process_for.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 26. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3358: Executive Committee for Expedited Permitting,” October 25, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/so_3358_executive_committee_for_ expedited_permitting_0.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 27. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3360: Rescinding Authorities Inconsistent with Secretary’s Order 3349, “American Energy Independence,” December 22, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/ documents/3360_-_rescinding_authorities_inconsistent_with_secretarys_order_3349_american_energy_ independence.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 28. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3380: Public Notice of the Costs Associated with Developing Department of the Interior Publications and Similar Documents,” March 10, 2020, https://www.doi.gov/sites/ doi.gov/files/elips/documents/so-3398-508_0.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 29. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3385: Enforcement Priorities,” September 14, 2020, https:// www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/signed-so-3385-enforcement-priorities.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 30. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order 3389: Coordinating and Clarifying National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 Reviews,” September 14, 2020, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/signed- so-3385-enforcement-priorities.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 31. Bureau of Land Management, “Updating Oil and Gas Leasing Reform: Land Use Planning and Lease Parcel Reviews,” IM 2018–034, January 31, 2018, https://www.blm.gov/policy/im-2018-034 (accessed March 16, 2023). 32. Lease Now Act, S. 4228, 117th Cong., 2nd Sess. (2022). 33. ONSHORE Act, S. 218, 116th Cong., 2nd Sess. (2019). https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate- bill/218/text (accessed March 18, 2023). 34. Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 130 (July 8, 2022), pp. 40859–40863. 35. The Biden Administration’s 2023–2028 proposed program is fatally flawed. Katie Tubb, “Comment for the 2023–2028 National OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Proposed Program,” BOEM–2022–0031, October 6, 2022, http:// thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/2022/Regulatory_Comments/BOEM%202023-2028%20lease%20plan%20 comment%20KTubb.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 36. See Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, Public Law No. 117–169, §§ 50261–50263. 37. Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, Public Law No. 115–97, § 20001, and U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3401: Comprehensive Analysis and Temporary Halt on All Activities in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Relating to the Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program,” June 1, 2021, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/ documents/so-3401-comprehensive-analysis-and-temporary-halt-on-all-activitives-in-the-arctic-national- wildlife-refuge-relating-to-the-coastal-plain-oil-and-gas-leasing-program.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 38. In 2016, Interior Secretary Sally Jewell instituted a moratorium on new coal leases while conducting a programmatic environmental impact statement under NEPA to address concerns about competition and inconsistency with the Obama Administration’s climate policy. In 2017, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke lifted the moratorium and ended development of a programmatic environmental impact statement. In April 2021, Interior Secretary Debra Haaland rescinded Zinke’s order and initiated a new review of the coal-leasing program. See U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3338: Discretionary Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement to Modernize the Federal Coal Program,” January 15, 2016, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi. gov/files/elips/documents/archived-3338_-discretionary_programmatic_environmental_impact_statement_ to_modernize_the_federal_coal_program.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023); U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3348”; U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3398”; and Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 159 (August 20, 2021), pp. 46873–46877. — 541 — Department of the Interior 39. Katie Tubb, “No More Standoffs: Protecting Federal Employees and Ending the Culture of Anti-Government Attacks and Abuse,” testimony before the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands, Committee on Natural Resources, U.S. House of Representatives, pp. 2–4, October 22, 2019, https://congress. gov/116/meeting/house/110104/witnesses/HHRG-116-II10-Wstate-TubbK-20191022.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 40. News release, “Secretary Haaland Announces Steps to Establish Protections for Culturally Significant Chaco Canyon Landscape,” U.S. Department of the Interior, November 15, 2021, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/ secretary-haaland-announces-steps-establish-protections-culturally-significant-chaco (accessed March 16, 2023); News release, “Biden–Harris Administration Proposes Protections for Thompson Divide,” U.S. Department of the Interior, October 12, 2022, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/biden-harris-administration- proposes-protections-thompson-divide (accessed March 16, 2023); News release, “Biden Administration Takes Action to Complete Study of Boundary Waters Area Watershed,” U.S. Department of the Interior, October 20, 2021, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/biden-administration-takes-action-complete-study-boundary- waters-area-watershed (accessed March 16, 2023); and News release, “Interior Department Takes Action on Mineral Leases Improperly Renewed in the Watershed of the Boundary Waters Wilderness,” U.S. Department of the Interior, January 26, 2022, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/interior-department-takes-action- mineral-leases-improperly-renewed-watershed-boundary (accessed March 16, 2023). 41. Endangered Species Act, Public Law 91–135, § 4(b)(2), and Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 244 (December 18, 2020), pp. 82376–82389. 42. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, “Governing the Take of Migratory Birds Under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.” https://www.fws.gov/regulations/mbta (accessed March 16, 2023). 43. Dino Grandoni and Anna Phillips, “Biden Restores Climate Safeguards in Key Environmental Law, Reversing Trump,” Washington Post, April 19, 2022, https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate- environment/2022/04/19/biden-nepa-climate-trump/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 44. Donald Trump, “Executive Order on Creating Schedule F in the Accepted Service,” Executive Order 13957, October 21, 2020, https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-creating- schedule-f-excepted-service/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 45. Kathleen Masterson, “Nevada Wild Horse Population Skyrockets To New High,” KUNR Public Radio, July 22, 2019, https://www.kunr.org/energy-and-environment/2019-07-22/nevada-wild-horse-population-skyrockets- to-new-high (accessed March 20, 2023). 46. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, “Report to Congress: An Analysis of Achieving a Sustainable Horse and Burro Program,” Fact sheet, May 8, 2020, https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/ Final%20Fact%20Sheet%20WHB%20Report%20To%20Congress.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 47. Pendley, Sagebrush Rebel, pp. 45–47. 48. James D. Linxwiler, The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act At 35: Delivering on the Promise, Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Institute, Vol. 53, Chap. 12 (2007), § 12.03(1)(a)(iv), https://www.guessrudd.com/wp-content/ uploads/sites/1600422/2020/05/The-Alaska-Native-Claims-Settlement-Act-at-35.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 49. Ibid., § 12.03(1)(a)(vii). See generally Richard S. Jones, Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 (Public Law 92–203): History And Analysis Together With Subsequent Amendments, Report No. 81–127 GOV, June 1, 1981, http://www.alaskool.org/PROJECTS/ANCSA/reports/rsjones1981/ANCSA_History71.htm (accessed March 16, 2023). 50. 43 U.S. Code, Ch. 33. ANCSA also created 12 Native-owned regional corporations and authorized $962 million in “seed money.” Linxwiler, The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act At 35, § 12.03(2)(e). 51. ANCSA provided that the withdrawal of the lands would expire in 1978 if Congress had not designated the lands as federal enclaves. John K. Norman Cole and Steven W. Silver, Alaska’s D-2 Lands, Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Institute, Vol. 6B, Ch. 5, September 1978, and Raymond A. Peck, Jr., And Then There Were None: Evolving Federal Restraints on the Availability of Public Lands for Mineral Development, Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Institute, Vol. 25, Ch. 3, 1979. 52. Andrus used purported authority under the FLPMA to withdraw 40 million acres, and Carter used purported authority under the Antiquities Act of to withdraw 56 million acres. James D. Linxwiler, The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act: The First Twenty Years, Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Institute, Vol. 38 Ch. 2, 1992 at 2.04(8)(c), https://ancsa.lbblawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/ANCSA-Paper-with-Table-of-Contents-1992.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023).

Department of the Interior

Weak

Vector: 54%

Pages: 575-577AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill establishes a national monument to preserve the Historic Greenwood District and educate about the Tulsa Race Massacre, focusing on historical preservation and community engagement. The Project 2025 Interior section primarily addresses land use, resource development, and opposition to federal land conservation initiatives like the 30x30 plan, showing minimal thematic overlap with the bill's commemorative and educational goals."

Key themes:Department of the Interiorland managementnational monuments

— 542 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 53. Alaska’s request for an injunction was denied. State of Alaska v. Carter, 462 F. Supp. 1155, 1156 (D. Alaska 1978) (NEPA does not apply to presidential proclamations under the Antiquities Act). Alaska’s lawsuit was similar to one filed by Wyoming challenging use of the Antiquities Act to designate the Grand Teton National Monument. Wyoming v. Franke, 58 F. Supp. 890 (D. Wyo. 1945). See generally Carol Hardy Vincent and Kristina Alexander, “National Monuments and the Antiquities Act,” Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, R41330, July 20, 2010, https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc813640/m2/1/high_res_d/ R41330_2011Aug22.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). In December 1980, President Carter signed the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservations Act; subsequently, during the Reagan Administration, Alaska dropped its lawsuit. 54. Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, Public Law 96–487 (codified as amended in scattered sections of 16 U.S.C., 43 U.S.C., 48 U.S.C.), and Joseph J. Perkins, Jr., The Great Land Divided But Not Conquered: The Effects of Statehood, ANCSA, and ANILCA on Alaska, Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Institute, Vol. 34, Ch. 6, 1988, § 6.02. 55. U.S. Department of the Interior, 1983: A Year Of Enrichment: Improving The Quality Of Life For All Americans, October 1983, p. 25, https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/public/digitallibrary/smof/publicliaison/blackwell/box- 006/40_047_7006969_006_022_2017.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 56. Ibid. The conveyances by the Reagan Administration to Alaska and Native Alaskans greatly exceeded the amount of land transferred to each during the Carter Administration. See U.S. Department of the Interior, 1983: A Year Of Enrichment, pp. 86–87. 57. Federal Register, Vol. 36, No. 252 (December 31, 1971), pp. 25410–25412. “On December 28, 1971, ten days after enactment of ANCSA, the Secretary of Interior through his Assistant Secretary issued Public Land Order (PLO) 5150 which withdrew and reserved various federal public lands, subject to valid existing rights, as a utility and transportation corridor for the Alaska oil pipeline. 36 Fed. Reg. 25410 (December 31, 1971). The land order was issued ‘by virtue of the authority vested in the President and pursuant to Executive Order 10355 of May 26, 1952 (17 Fed. Reg. 4831)….PLO 5150 established a corridor extending from the North Slope of Alaska (Prudhoe Bay) south to Valdez on Prince William Sound.’” Wisenak, Inc. v. Andrus, 471 F. Supp. 1004, 1006 (D. Alaska 1979). 58. Alaska Land Transfer Acceleration Act, Public Law 108–452. 59. Philip Elliott, “Biden May Be About to Sign Off on a Huge Alaska Oil Drilling Project,” Time, December 13, 2022, https://time.com/6240733/biden-alaska-oil-drilling-willow-project/ (accessed March 16, 2023). A Biden approval of the bare minimum three pads for ConocoPhillips disincentivized the ability of any other oil and gas company to make the huge investment necessary to operate in NPRA. 60. Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Mining, Land and Water, “Ambler Road Project,” https:// dnr.alaska.gov/mlw/ambler-road/ (accessed March 17, 2023). 61. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Ambler Road: Environmental Impact Statement: Vol. 1, March 2020, https://eplanning.blm.gov/public_projects/nepa/57323/20015364/250020506/Ambler_ FEIS_Volume_1-_Chp_1-3_&__Appendices_A-F_.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 62. 5 U.S. Code § 801(a)(1)(A). 63. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Master Memorandum of Understanding Between the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Juneau, Alaska and the U.S. National Park Service,” October 14, 1982; U.S. Department of the Interior, “Master Memorandum of Understanding Between the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Juneau, Alaska and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Survey,” March 13, 1982; and U.S. Department of the Interior, “Master Memorandum of Understanding Between the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Juneau, Alaska and the Bureau of Land Management,” August 3, 1983, https://eplanning.blm.gov/public_projects/ lup/66967/84127/100727/Memorandum_of_Understanding_BLM_and_ADFG.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 64. Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 210 (October 29, 2020), pp. 68668–68703. 65. Federal Register, Vol. 88, No. 18 (January 27, 2023), pp. 5252–5272. 66. E. Dinerstein et al., “A Global Deal For Nature: Guiding Principles, Milestones, and Targets,” Science Advances, Vol. 5, No. 4 (April 19, 2019), https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aaw2869 (accessed March 18, 2023). 67. Joseph R. Biden, “Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad,” Executive Order 14008, https://www. whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/27/executive-order-on-tackling-the-climate- crisis-at-home-and-abroad/ (accessed March 17, 2023). — 543 — Department of the Interior 68. Karen Budd Falen, “Biden’s ‘30 By 30 Plan’: A Slap at American Private Property Rights,” Cowboy State Daily, April 15, 2021, https://cowboystatedaily.com/2021/04/15/bidens-30-by-30-plan-a-slap-at-american-private- property-rights/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 69. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3396: Rescission of Secretary’s Order 3388, ‘Land and Water Conservation Fund Implementation by the U.S. Department of the Interior,’” February 11, 2021, https://www. doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/so-3396-signed-2-11-21-final.pdf (accessed March 17, 2021). 70. Ibid. 71. Associated Press, “Ute Indian Tribe Criticizes Biden’s Camp Hale Monument Designation,” KUER 90.1, October 13, 2022. 72. William Perry Pendley, “Trump Wants to Free Up Federal Lands, His Interior Secretary Fails Him,” National Review Online, September 25, 2017, https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/09/secretary-interior-ryan-zinke- monuments-review-trump-executive-order-antiquities-act-environmentalists/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 73. The Oregon and California Revested Lands Sustained Yield Management Act of 1937, Public Law 75-405, 43 U.S. Code § 2601. 74. Ibid., and American Forest Resource Council v. Hammond, 422 F. Supp. 3d 184, 187 (D.D.C. 2019). 75. American Forest Resource Council v. Hammond, 422 F. Supp. 3d, pp. 187–188. 76. Federal Register, Vol. 55, No. 26 (June 26, 1990), p. 26114–26194. 77. Federal Register, Vol. 65, No. 114 (June 13, 2000), pp. 37249–37252. 78. Federal Register, Vol. 82, No. 11 (January 18, 2017), pp. 6145–6150. 79. American Forest Resource Council v. Hammond, 422 F. Supp. 3d 184 (D.D.C. 2019). 80. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Final Consent Decrees/Settlement Agreements,” https://www.doi.gov/ solicitor/transparency/final (accessed March 16, 2023). 81. Michael Doyle, “Interior Order Erases Litigation Website,” E&E News, June 17, 2022, https://www.eenews.net/ articles/interior-order-erases-litigation-website/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 82. Rob Roy Ramey, On the Origin of Specious Species (Lexington Books 2012), pp. 77–97. 83. William Perry Pendley, “Killing Jobs to Save the Sage Grouse: Junk Science, Weird Science, and Plain Nonsense,” Washington Times, May 31, 2012, https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/31/killing- jobs-to-save-the-sage-grouse/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 84. Michael Lee, “Wyoming’s Push to Delist Grizzly Bears from Endangered Species List Faces Opposition from Anti-Hunting Group,” Fox News, January 21, 2022, https://www.foxnews.com/politics/wyoming-delist-grizzly- endangered-species-list-opposition-anti-hunting-group (accessed March 18, 2023). 85. News release, “Trump Administration Returns Management and Protection of Gray Wolves to States and Tribes Following Successful Recovery Efforts,” October 29, 2020, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/trump- administration-returns-management-and-protection-gray-wolves-states-and-tribes (accessed March 18, 2023). 86. 50 Code of Federal Regulations §17, and Sean Paige, “‘Rewilding’ Will Backfire on Colorado,” The Gazette, June 19, 2022, https://gazette.com/opinion/guest-column-rewilding-will-backfire-on-colorado/article_ d0016672-ed79-11ec-b027-abe62ba840a1.html (accessed March 18, 2023). 87. Madeleine C. Bottrill et al., “Is Conservation Triage Just Smart Decision Making?” Trends in Ecology & Evolution, Vol. 23, No. 12 (December 2008), pp. 649–654, https://karkgroup.org/wp-content/uploads/Bottrill-et-al-2008. pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 88. Rob Roy Ramey II, testimony before the Committee on Resources, U.S. House of Representatives, April 8, 2014, https://naturalresources.house.gov/uploadedfiles/rameytestimony4_8.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 89. Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, Public Law 95–87. 90. Pennsylvania is the nation’s third-largest coal producer, and its state program was the model for SMCRA. 91. Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 207 (October 26, 2020), pp. 67631–67635. 92. U.S. Department of the Interior, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, “Approximate Original Contour,” INE–26, June 23, 2020, https://www.osmre.gov/sites/default/files/pdfs/directive1003.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 93. Tim Gallaudet and Timothy R. Petty, “Federal Action Plan for Improving Forecasts of Water Availability,” National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, October 2019, https://www.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/ legacy/document/2019/Oct/Federal%20Action%20Plan%20for%20Improving%20Forecasts%20of%20 Water%20Availability.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023).

Department of the Interior

Minimal

Vector: 60%

Pages: 563-565AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill establishes a national monument to preserve the Historic Greenwood District and commemorate the Tulsa Race Massacre, focusing on historical preservation and education. The Project 2025 policy section addresses Alaska-specific land and resource management, opposing federal land acquisitions and monument designations under the Antiquities Act, with no thematic or geographic overlap."

— 531 — Department of the Interior Wildlife and Waters. Throughout Alaska’s history, the federal government has treated Alaska as less than a sovereign state. This is especially the case when it comes to two of Alaska’s most valued resources, its wildlife and its waters. Immediate action is required to end, at least in part, this injustice. A new Admin- istration should: l Revoke National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service rules regarding predator control and bear baiting, which are matters for state regulation. Such revocation is permitted under the 2017 Congressional Review Act.62 l Recognize Alaska’s authority to manage fish and game on all federal lands in accordance with ANILCA as during the Reagan Administration, when each DOI agency in Alaska signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game ceding to the state the lead on fish and wildlife management matters.63 l Issue a secretarial order declaring navigable waters in Alaska to be owned by the state so that the lands beneath these waters belong to Alaska. This will force the BLM to prove that water is not navigable, since in the case of non-navigability, any submerged lands belong to the BLM. Currently, BLM requires Alaska to prove navigability at its own expense—including the BLM’s preposterous assertion that the mighty Yukon River is non-navigable. l Reinstate President Trump’s 2020 Alaska Roadless Rule64 for the Tongass National Forest in Alaska, which was replaced by a Biden Roadless Rule that continues a 2001 Clinton rule affecting 9.37 million of the forest’s 16.7 million acres.65 The Clinton rule affects an area where communities are in small islands with no road access. It has prevented multiple infrastructure projects, including roads, electric transmission lines, and water and sewer projects, and it forces residents to use a heavily subsidized ferry system. Logging has been shut down to the extent that New York harvests more timber than does all of Alaska. OTHER ACTIONS The 30 by 30 Plan.66 President Biden’s Executive Order 14008 (30 by 30 plan)67 requires that the federal government, which already owns one-third of the country: (1) remove vast amounts of private property from productive use; and (2) end congressionally mandated uses of all federal land. The end result will be “total federal control of an additional 440 million acres of land or oceans in the U.S. by 2030.”68 — 532 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Although the new President should vacate that order, DOI under a conservative President must take immediate action on the 30 by 30 plan by vacating a secre- tarial order issued by the Biden DOI69 that eliminated the Trump Administration’s requirement for the approval of state and local governments before federal acquisi- tion of private property with monies from the Land and Water Conservation Fund.70 National Monument Designations. As has every Democratic President before him beginning with Jimmy Carter, Joe Biden has abused his authority under the Antiquities Act of 1906. Like the outrageous, unilateral withdrawals from public use of multiple use federal land under the Carter, Clinton, and Obama Administrations, Biden’s first national monument was one in Colorado—adopted over the objections of scores of local groups and at least one American Indian tribe.71 In the days before the 2024 election, Biden will likely designate more western monuments. Although President Trump courageously ordered a review of national mon- ument designations, the result of that review was insufficient in that only two national monuments in one state (Utah) were adjusted.72 Monuments in Maine and Oregon, for example, should have been adjusted downward given the finding of Secretary Ryan Zinke’s review that they were improperly designated. The new Administration’s review will permit a fresh look at past monument decrees and new ones by President Biden. Furthermore, the new Administration must vigorously defend the downward adjustments it makes to permit a ruling on a President’s authority to reduce the size of national monuments by the U.S. Supreme Court. Finally, the new Administration must seek repeal of the Antiquities Act of 1906, which permitted emergency action by a President long before the statutory author- ity existed for the protection of special federal lands, such as those with wild and scenic rivers, endangered specials, or other unique places. Moreover, in recent years, Congress has designated as national monuments those areas deserving of such congressional action. Oregon and California Lands Act. One national monument worthy of down- ward adjustment is in Oregon, where its designation and subsequent expansion interfere with the federal obligation to residents to harvest timber on its BLM lands. A federal district court ruled in 2019 that land subject to the Oregon and California (O&C) Grant Lands Act of 193773 was set aside by Congress to be har- vested for the benefit of the people of Oregon. Specifically, those federal lands are to be “managed…for permanent forest production” and its timber “sold, cut, and removed in conformity with the princip[le] of sustained yield.”74 As the district court concluded,75 beginning in 1990, the federal government erected a trifecta of illegal barriers to the accomplishment of the congressional mandate, beginning with a response to the listing of the northern spotted owl,76 continuing a decade later with the designation of the Cascade–Siskiyou National Monument,77 and concluding in 2017 with an expansion of that monument.78 In

15

Minimal

Vector: 54%

Pages: 539-541AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill establishes a national monument to preserve the Historic Greenwood District and commemorate the Tulsa Race Massacre, focusing on historical preservation and education. The Project 2025 policy excerpt discusses HUD restructuring, mortgage programs, fair housing enforcement, and bureaucratic reform, with no thematic connection to historic monuments or racial justice commemoration."

— 506 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Program (MMIF) and various other mortgage insurance, direct loan, and loan guarantee programs for single-family housing, multifamily housing, hospitals, and health care facilities that meet certain conditions.17 l Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA), headed by a Sen- ate-confirmed GNMA President or Executive Vice President. GNMA oversees more than $2 billion in federal guarantees to mortgage-backed securities structured from mortgages that are pooled from various federal programs, including mortgages backed by programs outside of HUD, principally the sin- gle-family mortgage guarantee programs administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the Rural Housing Service at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). FHA-insured single-family housing mortgages comprise the largest share of GNMA-guaranteed mortgage-backed securities. l Office of Departmental Equal Employment Opportunity, headed by a Director. l Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO), headed by a Senate-confirmed AS or PDAS. The Assistant Secretary for FHEO is the designated HUD official responsible for enforcing Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,18 Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973,19 and Section 109 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. After informal efforts to resolve noncompliance, the AS for FHEO may make a formal finding of noncompliance and initiate enforcement action before an administrative tribunal or a referral to the Department of Justice. l Office of General Counsel (OGC), headed by the General Counsel or Principal Deputy General Counsel. OGC handles department-wide legal and compliance oversight advice with supervision responsibilities for the Deputy General Counsel for Housing Programs, Deputy General Counsel for Operations, and Deputy General Counsel for Enforcement and Fair Housing as well as the Departmental Enforcement Center.20 l Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control (OHHLHC), headed by a Director. OHHLHC was established in the early 1990s to eliminate lead-based paint hazards in America’s privately owned and low-income housing, address healthy housing initiatives, and enforce lead-based paint regulations authorized under the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992 (Title X of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992).21 These functions overlap with similar functions of the Environmental Protection Agency (also authorized to enforce lead-based — 507 — Department of Housing and Urban Development paint regulations under Title X) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Healthy Homes Initiative, Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program, and National Asthma Control Program. l Office of Policy Development and Research (PDR), headed by a Senate- confirmed AS or PDAS. PDR was established in the early 1970s and today administers research activities, including external contract research grants, and provides analytical and policy advice to senior HUD staff. PDR also provides publicly available statistics through the American Housing Survey (AHS), which is sponsored by HUD and conducted by the Census Bureau; the State of the Cities Data Systems; data on the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC); and annual Fair Market Rents and Income Limits data, among other statistical publications and datasets on the characteristics of families assisted under HUD programs. l Office of Inspector General (OIG), headed by an Inspector General. The OIG is independent of HUD and one of 12 Inspectors General across the federal government authorized under the Inspector General Act of 1978.22 Operating under its own budget authority and strategic plan, the HUD OIG conducts internal and external audits and investigations of HUD programs and operations. While independent of HUD and holding no enforcement powers over HUD programs, HUD OIG works closely with the Office of General Counsel, the Departmental Enforcement Center, and HUD program offices. The Inspector General serves as an adviser to and non- voting member of the FHA Mortgagee Review Board. l Office of Field Policy and Management (FPM), headed by an Assistant Deputy Secretary for FPM. FPM supports the Secretary through regional and field office communication and external engagement with various community stakeholders to ensure the successful implementation of Secretarial initiatives and special projects. HUD REFORM PILLARS Ideally, Congress would redelegate authorities that have been diverted to HUD’s administrative bureaucracy and safeguard taxpayers against the mission creep that inevitably occurs when Congress delegates power to an empowered and unelected bureaucracy that is insulated by civil service protections. If implemented, the reforms proposed in this chapter can help a new conservative Administration to use its Article II powers to rectify bureaucratic overreach, reverse the expansion of programs beyond their statutory authority, and end progressive policies that have been put in place at the department.

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using a hybrid approach: initial candidates are found using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text, then an AI model (Llama 3.1 70B) provides detailed alignment ratings and analysis. Ratings range from 1 (minimal alignment) to 5 (very strong alignment). This analysis does not imply direct causation or intent.

Related Bills

Other Bills by Sen. Lankford, James

CIPZIP Act of 2025

119/s/3175

Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act

119/s/6

A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 201 West Oklahoma Avenue in Guthrie, Oklahoma, as the "Oscar J. Upham Post Office".

119/s/2283

Back to All Bills