I do not necessarily support every provision in this legislation as drafted, but I do support the underlying objective of redressing the balance of power and authority between Washington and Agana. As a result of my trip to Guam last year, I introduced legislation to deal with the disposal of surplus Federal property and prevent any future land grabs such as the one engaged in by the Fish and Wildlife Service. That legislation was not everything that either the Governor or I would have preferred, but I think that the end result of the Senate action, if finally enacted, will be a significant improvement in Federal- territorial relations. I intend to take the same constructive approach to the provisions of this legislation. I appreciate that questions have been raised over some of the provisions from constitutional as well as policy grounds, but that should not be an excuse to avoid addressing the underlying concerns that led to the drafting and approval of those provisions by the voters in Guam. As I said before, we have a lot of experience with foolish and petty restrictions from Federal agencies. As a percentage, far more of Alaska is subject to Federal land domination and our communities suffer the consequences of an inability to obtain transportation and utility corridors across the Federal lands.
Lisa Murkowski: “I do not necessarily support every provision in this legislation as drafted, but I do support the underlying objective…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing legislation aimed at improving federal-territorial relations with Guam.
Share
More from Lisa Murkowski
I am also keenly aware that the Department’s nearly $2-billion dollar slush fund—which likely would have rewarded January 6 protesters—is only off the table because this nomination is pending and the Senate has leverage.
I’m glad to once again partner on bipartisan, bi-cameral legislation to develop and implement a unified National Resilience Strategy.
I hope Mr. Blanche is able to achieve that, if confirmed, but I simply do not have confidence that will be the case.
I look at the War Powers Resolution, and it’s not ambiguous. It requires the president to terminate hostilities within 60 days absent congressional authorization.





