PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Indian Affairs. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Nov 1, 2021
This bill provides a process by which the Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon and Oregon may negotiate to amend or replace the existing agreement defining the tribe's hunting, fishing, trapping, and animal gathering rights.
The current agreement, which was made effective by a January 12, 1987, consent decree by the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon, serves as the exclusive and final determination of the tribe's hunting, fishing, trapping, and gathering rights. This bill instead allows a December 2, 1986, agreement between the United States, Oregon, and the tribe (known as the Grand Ronde Hunting and Fishing Agreement) to define the tribe's rights until and unless it is amended or replaced upon mutual agreement of the tribe and Oregon.
The bill allows the tribe and Oregon to return to the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon to request the modification or termination of the January 12, 1987, consent decree.
People & committees
Sen. Merkley, Jeff [D-OR] · D–OR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 117-518.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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 S.3126 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 S.3126 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 S.3126 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 S.3126 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.