PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 824.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 7, 2017
This bill amends the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act to recognize the Alaska Native group of Alexander Creek as a Native village eligible for land and benefits under the Act.
Alexander Creek must file any amendments to its corporate charter that are necessary to convert from a Native group to a Native village.
The Department of the Interior must open negotiations with Alexander Creek to settle Alexander Creek's aboriginal land claims and any other claims it has against the United States.
Alexander Creek must notify its members that: (1) they will cease to receive benefits from Cook Inlet Region Incorporated (CIRI) individually as at-large shareholders, and (2) all future resource payments from the region will be made to the village. CIRI is not liable under any state, federal, or local law for damages related to that payment cessation.
People & committees
Rep. Young, Don [R-AK-At Large] · R–AK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 824.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 115-1058.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 115-1058.
Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Indian, Insular and Alaska Native Affairs.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1418 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1418 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1418 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1418 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.