119-S-1513 DC Insider Whip Count Analysis

Breakdown: support by party/caucus and institutional signals

• Status snapshot: S.1513 was introduced by Sens. Cantwell and Murray and referred to Indian Affairs; the committee held a legislative hearing on December 17, 2025 and, at a May 20, 2026 business meeting, advanced the bill. The committee’s May 22 release lists both S.1513 and the House companion H.R.2388 as passed out of committee. [2]Congress.gov — All Info - S.1513 (119th): Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe Project Lan…
• House baseline: H.R.2388 passed the House under suspension on December 9, 2025 and was received in the Senate on December 10, 2025, with text that includes an explicit prohibition on gaming on the transferred lands. [3]Congress.gov — Congressional Record excerpt (Dec. 9, 2025): House considers H.R…
• Executive/agency posture: At the Senate hearing, the Department of the Interior (BIA) described S.1513 and stated the Department supports conveying these lands into trust for the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe. [4]U.S. Department of the Interior (BIA) via BLM — DOI/BIA Testimony on S.1513 et…
• Outside validators: National Parks Conservation Association publicly supports the bill; local coverage on May 22, 2026 highlighted committee passage and the salmon/restoration benefits cited by backers. [5]National Parks Conservation Association — NPCA position: H.R.2388 Lower Elwha K…
• Senate GOP outlook: Republicans hold the Senate majority this Congress; Majority Leader John Thune controls floor time. With Chair Murkowski moving the bill and no recorded committee opposition, leadership has a low-cost path to hotline the House bill for unanimous consent. [6]U.S. Senate — U.S. Senate: Majority and Minority Leaders (119th shows Thune as…
• Senate Democrats/Independents: Prime sponsors are Cantwell and Murray; Vice Chairman Brian Schatz has been publicly associated with advancing the committee’s package, signaling caucus support. [2]Congress.gov — All Info - S.1513 (119th): Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe Project Lan…

Key legislators and leverage points

• Lisa Murkowski (R‑AK), Chair, Senate Indian Affairs — set the agenda/markup and announced committee passage of S.1513/H.R.2388; her support is the single strongest procedural cue for Senate movement. [7]U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs — SCIA homepage (Chair/Vice Chair; May…
• Brian Schatz (D‑HI), Vice Chair — joined Murkowski in the committee release backing the eight‑bill package that includes this measure. [1]U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs — Press release: Murkowski, Schatz lead…
• John Thune (R‑SD), Senate Majority Leader — determines if/when to bring the measure up (likely via the hotline/UC route) or to burn floor time if objections materialize. [6]U.S. Senate — U.S. Senate: Majority and Minority Leaders (119th shows Thune as…
• Maria Cantwell (D‑WA) and Patty Murray (D‑WA), Senate sponsors — will press for floor action; Cantwell’s office has promoted the trust transfer’s restoration benefits, aligning with DOI/NPCA messaging. [2]Congress.gov — All Info - S.1513 (119th): Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe Project Lan…
• Emily Randall (D‑WA‑06), House sponsor — already delivered the House vehicle; her floor management under suspension indicates cross‑aisle tolerance, which matters if the Senate opts to pass H.R.2388 as received. [3]Congress.gov — Congressional Record excerpt (Dec. 9, 2025): House considers H.R…
• House leadership context: Speaker Mike Johnson presides over a GOP House that has already cleared this bill; no additional House action is required if the Senate passes H.R.2388. [8]U.S. House of Representatives — House.gov leadership page (Speaker Mike Johnson)

Leadership influence and procedural dynamics

• Fastest path: Senate takes up H.R.2388 by unanimous consent to avoid a second round of conferencing or messaging. This is routine for non‑controversial Indian Affairs land/trust bills that have cleared committee. [1]U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs — Press release: Murkowski, Schatz lead…
• UC reality check: Most Senate business moves by unanimous consent; one objection can force time‑consuming cloture. For a low‑salience, agency‑supported local bill, leaders typically hotline first. [9]U.S. Senate — U.S. Senate explainer: The Senate in Session (UC and single‑membe…
• What could jam it: Any single senator can object to UC for policy or leverage reasons unrelated to the bill; if that happens, leadership must decide whether to burn floor time. Given House passage and DOI support, the burden of objection is high. [9]U.S. Senate — U.S. Senate explainer: The Senate in Session (UC and single‑membe…

Assessment: likelihood of passage

Bottom line: With the House vehicle already across the Capitol, bipartisan committee action in the Senate, supportive agency testimony, and visible outside backing, this measure is well‑positioned for UC passage this work period; principal risk is a one‑member objection that diverts scarce floor time. Confidence: high. [10]Congress.gov — H.R.2388 (RFS): Received in Senate (text incl. gaming prohibitio…