On the recordDecember 9, 2015
I appreciate the chairman's yielding to me. I also appreciate the considerable efforts that have gone on not just in the past few weeks and months but all the way back to the last Congress with Congressman Cole, with the Governor's Office of Oklahoma, and with the tribes directly to try to make sure that any concern was addressed. Mr. Chairman, let me just say one overall point. Actually, the gentlewoman from Massachusetts made this really clear, which is that in going back to at least 1867 there is no tribal claim that goes south of the median line of the river. As a result, really, the only interests that could be threatened are that narrow strip of sand that the Federal Government does have a rightful claim on or its expansion beyond its rightful claim. There should be no question of any tribal surface or mineral interest that is impinged by this legislation because they only ever went to the middle of the river. What we are talking about is the south bank of the river, which is what the BLM is now claiming. I want to address the $1.25 issue because the bill requires that any land sold to an adjacent landowner or to anybody else be sold at current market value. The only exception is if, for a period of at least 20 years, you have owned the land, if you have a deed to the land, if you have paid taxes on the land, or if the Federal Government has never made a claim on the land for at least 20 years.…
