PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Aug 5, 2010
Pigford and Individual Indian Money Account Litigation Settlement Act of 2010 - Appropriates to the Department of Agriculture $1.15 billion to carry out the terms of a Settlement Agreement executed by In re Black Farmers Discrimination Litigation that is approved by a court order that has become final and nonappealable, and that is comprehensive and provides for the final settlement of all remaining Pigford claims (relating to a racial discrimination action against the Department of Agriculture). Provides that the $1.15 billion shall be in addition to the $100 million in funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) made available for the payment of Pigford claims and are available only after such CCC funds have been fully obligated. Provides that if such Settlement Agreement is not executed and approved as provided above, then the sole funding available for Pigford claims shall be the $100 million of CCC funds.
Authorizes, ratifies, and confirms the Class Action Settlement Agreement dated December 7, 2009, in the case entitled Elouise Cobell et al. v. Ken Salazar et al.
Establishes the Trust Land Consolidation Fund, and provides for the deposit of $2 billion in the Fund, on final approval of the Settlement, with funds being made available to the Secretary of the Interior: (1) to conduct the Land Consolidation Program (a program under which the Secretary may purchase fractional interests in trust or restricted land); and (2) for other costs of the Settlement.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Establishes, on final approval of the Settlement, the Indian Education Scholarship Holding Fund to provide scholarships for Native Americans through an Indian Education Scholarship Fund.
Excludes amounts received by an individual Indian as a lump sum or a periodic payment pursuant to the Settlement from: (1) gross income and adjusted gross income under the Internal Revenue Code; and (2) being considered for purposes of determining eligibility or level of benefits under any federal or federally assisted program, during the one-year period beginning on the date of receipt.
Provides for the determination of incentive awards, fees, expenses, and costs under the Settlement.
People & committees
Sen. Barrasso, John [R-WY] · R–WY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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 S.3754 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.3754 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.3754 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.3754 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.