PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to House Financial Services
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Dec 15, 2010
Former Bennett Freeze Area Development Act - Requires the Commissioner of the Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation (ONHIR), by request of the Navajo Nation or the Hopi Tribe by tribal resolution, to enter into a self-determination contract or contracts with the requesting Indian tribe to plan, conduct, and administer programs, functions, services, or activities, including construction programs administered by the Commissioner that pertain directly to the requesting Indian tribe.
Establishes the Former Bennett Freeze Area Rehabilitation Trust Fund in the Treasury.
Makes amounts in the Fund available to the Navajo Nation solely for purposes which will contribute to the continuing rehabilitation and improvement of the economic, housing, infrastructure, health, educational, and social condition of families, and Navajo communities, that have been affected by the former Bennett Freeze.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Authorizes the Commissioner to carry out a rehabilitation program to redress the effects of federal development restrictions (Bennett Freeze) in the western portion of the Navajo Reservation, limited to housing construction and renovation, infrastructure improvements, and economic development initiatives. Repeals requirements that: (1) the United States be reimbursed for funds appropriated to the Navajo Rehabilitation Trust Fund before its termination; and (2) the income derived by the Navajo Tribe from the surface and mineral estates of certain lands located in New Mexico acquired for the Tribe's benefit be used to reimburse the General Fund of the U.S. Treasury. Reauthorizes the Fund.
Grants the Navajo Nation the right to negotiate and approve an Accommodation Agreement with the Hopi Tribe for any Navajo head of household residing on Hopi Partitioned Land that has not otherwise entered into such Agreement but intends to remain on the Land.
Amends the Navajo-Hopi Land Dispute Settlement Act of 1996 to grant any Navajo family that has entered into an Accommodation Agreement the right to: (1) relinquish that Agreement at any time up until the closure of the ONHIR; and after such relinquishment (2) receive the full relocation benefits to which the family would otherwise have been entitled had the family not signed such Agreement, including relocation housing, counseling, and other services.
People & committees
Rep. Kirkpatrick, Ann [D-AZ-1] · D–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to House Financial Services
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to House Natural Resources
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 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.6525 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.6525 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.6525 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.6525 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.