ARTIST Act

What this does

This bill rewrites the Alaska Native exemption in the Marine Mammal Protection Act to bar States from prohibiting sale or possession of marine mammal ivory, bone, or baleen worked into authentic Alaska Native handicrafts.

House vote · 404-14

Democrats207–0

Republicans196–14

Independents1–0

How we know · 7 sourced claims

The bill amends Section 101(b) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1371(b)), replacing the Alaska Native exemption.Source: Sec. 2: "Section 101(b) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act Of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1371(b)) is amended to read as follows"
It bars any State from prohibiting the interstate commerce, importation, sale, transfer, trade, barter, or possession of marine mammal ivory, bone, or baleen worked by an Alaska Native into an authentic Alaska Native handicraft.Source: Sec. 2, new subsection (b)(4) Prohibitions: "No State shall prohibit the interstate commerce, importation, sale, offer for sale, transfer, trade, barter, possession, or possession with the intent to sell, transfer, trade, or barter of marine mammal ivory or marine mammal bone or baleen incorporated under this title by an Alaska Native, into an authentic Alaska Native article of handicrafts and clothing."
It preserves the exemption letting Alaska Natives on the North Pacific or Arctic coast take marine mammals for subsistence or to create and sell authentic handicrafts, if not done in a wasteful manner.Source: Sec. 2, new subsection (b)(2)(A): taking "is for subsistence purposes; or ... is done for purposes of creating and selling authentic Alaska Native articles of handicrafts and clothing; and ... is not accomplished in a wasteful manner."
It defines marine mammal ivory as a tooth or tusk from a walrus or a cetacean.Source: Sec. 2, new subsection (b)(1)(B): "The term marine mammal ivory includes a tooth or tusk from a walrus (Odobenus rosmarus) or a species of cetacean."
It requires the Secretary to show in writing, posted publicly, that any regulation or depletion determination affecting these stocks or persons is supported by substantial evidence in consideration of the whole record including Indigenous knowledge.Source: Sec. 2, new subsection (b)(3)(D): the Secretary "shall demonstrate in writing (and make such writing publicly available on the website of the Secretary) that, in consideration of the whole record, including Indigenous knowledge, such regulation, assessment, determination, or finding is supported by substantial evidence."
That evidentiary requirement applies only in an action brought by one or more Alaska Native organizations.Source: Sec. 2, new subsection (b)(3)(E) Applicability: "The requirement under subparagraph (D) shall only be applicable in an action brought by one or more Alaska Native organizations representing persons to which this subsection applies."
The bill is single-subject: two sections, a short title and one amendment to MMPA Section 101(b), with no unrelated rider.Source: Sec. 1 (Short title) and Sec. 2 (Alaska Native handicrafts), the only two sections; all provisions amend 16 U.S.C. 1371(b).

Read the bill on congress.gov ↗

Your representatives

How did your member vote on this?

House roll call

The full roll call

R196–14D207–0I1–0

Position

Party

State

Republicans

217

Democrats

212

Independents

YeaKevin KileyCA · District 3