The Fulcrum introduces Congress Bill Spotlight, a weekly report by Jesse Rifkin, focusing on the noteworthy legislation of the thousands introduced in Congress. Rifkin has written about Congress for years, and now he's dissecting the most interesting bills you need to know about, but that often don't get the right news coverage.
President Donald Trump wants the U.S. to control Greenland. A bill in Congress could help.
The bill
laying off Trump’s campaign slogan “Make America great again,” the Make Greenland Great Again Act would give the president congressional authorization to enter into negotiations with Denmark about acquiring their territory. The bill would technically apply to any president, not just to Trump.
It would also specify that any such potential Greenland acquisition deal becomes official unless Congress disapproves it within 60 days. That’s essentially the exact opposite of the way international deals like treaties are supposed to work: namely, that even if the president signs a treaty, the U.S. only becomes a party once Congress affirmatively approves it.
The House bill was introduced on January 13 by Rep. Andy Ogles (R-TN5). No Senate companion version appears to have been introduced yet.
Context: Trump
In his first term, Trump expressed interest in U.S. ownership of Greenland, whether through a financial purchase or a potential land trade – with one trade reportedly involving the U.S. territory of Puerto Rico. The whole Greenland idea, originally pitched to Trump by fellow billionaire Ronald Lauder of the Estée Lauder cosmetics company, ultimately went nowhere.
The U.S. previously attempted to purchase Greenland in 1868 for $5.5 million, then again in 1946 for $100 million. But certain aspects make the current idea different.
- Timing: The U.S. hasn’t added new territory since 1947. So while adding Greenland very much fit the trend of national expansion circa 1868 or 1946, it’s literally unprecedented within the lifetimes of most Americans alive today.
- Military possibility: In a press conference two weeks before his second inauguration, Trump refused to rule out military force to obtain Greenland.
Context: Greenland itself
Greenland is a self-governing territory within the Kingdom of Denmark, home to only 56,000 people. For comparison, five random U.S. small cities or towns with populations around that size are Harrisonburg, Virginia; Parker, Colorado; Euless, Texas; Sammamish, Washington; and Manhattan, Kansas.
But what Greenland lacks in people it makes up in size, natural resources, and geographical importance.
- Size: it’s the largest island in the world, with more square miles than Mexico.
- Natural resources: the land is plentiful with elements used in technologies like electric vehicles and artificial intelligence, plus oil reserves representing potentially more than four years’ worth of U.S. usage.
- Geographical importance: Greenland is near geopolitical rivals China and Russia, which is why the U.S. has maintained a military base there since 1951.
What supporters say
Supporters argue that the U.S. needs Greenland to better defend against its geopolitical rivals.
“The acquisition of Greenland by the United States is essential to our national security,” Rep. Ogles said in a press release days before Trump was inaugurated. “Joe Biden took a blowtorch to our reputation these past four years, [but] before even taking office, President Trump is telling the world that America First is back. American economic and security interests will no longer take a backseat.”
Trump’s top foreign policy official also defended the idea.
Greenland “long has been a curiosity or something people have not talked about, but I think now we have the opportunity to see it for what it is,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in his Senate confirmation hearing. “And that is, if not the most important, one of the most critical parts of the world over the next 100 years will be whether there's going to be freedom of navigation in the Arctic, and what that will mean for global trade and commerce.”
What opponents say
Greenland and Denmark's political leaders have expressed hesitancy.
“We don’t want to be Americans,” Greenland’s Prime Minister Múte Egede said in a Fox News interview with Bret Baier. “We don’t want to be a part of the U.S., but we want a strong cooperation together with the U.S.”
“Greenland is not for sale,” Denmark’s Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen echoed, in her office’s summary of points she made to Trump on a phone call. “It is up to Greenland itself to make a decision on independence.”
Former President Joe Biden’s top foreign policy official also opposes the proposal.
“The idea expressed about Greenland is obviously not a good one,” Biden’s Secretary of State Antony Blinken said at a press conference. “But maybe more important, it’s obviously one that’s not going to happen.”
Odds of passage
The bill has attracted 16 cosponsors, all Republicans. Curiously, one of the original cosponsors – Rep. Neal Dunn (R-FL2) – withdrew only two days after signing on, but didn’t provide a public reason why.
It now awaits a potential vote in the House Foreign Affairs Committee, controlled by Republicans.
A similar bill
On February 10, Rep. Buddy Carter (R-GA1) introduced a similar bill, with a noteworthy addition: it would rename Greenland as Red, White, and Blueland.
“America is back and will soon be bigger than ever,” Rep. Carter said in a press release. “President Trump has correctly identified the purchase of what is now Greenland as a national security priority, and we will proudly welcome its people to join the freest nation to ever exist when our Negotiator-in-Chief inks this monumental deal.”
The Red, White, and Blueland Act awaits a potential vote in either the House Foreign Affairs or Natural Resources Committee, controlled by Republicans. It has not yet attracted any cosponsors.
Jesse Rifkin is a freelance journalist with the Fulcrum. Don’t miss his weekly report, Congress Bill Spotlight, every Friday on the Fulcrum. Rifkin’s writings about politics and Congress have been published in the Washington Post, Politico, Roll Call, Los Angeles Times, CNN Opinion, GovTrack, and USA Today.
SUGGESTIONS:
Congress Bill Spotlight: BIG OIL from the Cabinet Act
Congress Bill Spotlight: renaming Gulf of Mexico as “Gulf of America”
Congress Bill Spotlight: constitutional amendment letting Trump be elected to a third term
Children watch a July Fourth Parade along the Walkway of Heroes and Independence Avenue on July 04, 2026 in Tappan, New York.
The Great American Grumpfest
Our nation’s 250th birthday party didn’t feel especially patriotic and wasn’t as much fun as the 200th anniversary was.
President Trump, who did his best to co-opt our holiday for his personal aggrandizement, was a major reason. The party he threw in Washington, D.C., was crankier than uplifting, and less about celebrating our shared past and a promising future than about reminding us how far we have strayed from our founders’ plan to create a republic that future Americans would keep in good working order.
Credit Trump this much. He has a singular gift for picking at scabs that other politicians would rather ignore and pushing us into reckonings we don’t need.
The thing is, Americans have seen all this before. Sometimes the makeover we were encouraged to undertake was more conservative, sometimes more liberal. Whatever direction we were pushing, however, the reckoning we had in mind this time had to be more forthright and the conclusion more definitive than it was the last time.
Our current discontents, the ones behind the reckoning President Trump has been trying to inspire, are not trivial. Included among them are immigration, birthright citizenship, exploding healthcare costs, election rigging, a gag-inducing national debt, how we educate our children, too many genders, racial differences we can’t move past, a lopsided economy that favors more well-off Americans, and historic levels of political corruption and graft. Add to these the several foreign adventures he has pushed us into or is anxious to undertake, and you have the makings of a national headache the likes of which we haven’t had in half a century.
All the elbow-throwing and overheated rhetoric we’re using today have begun to look almost normal in all the ways that bickering neighbors and feuding family members appear normal. But they have also made us look mean-spirited and have portrayed our differences as irreconcilable. To ourselves, of course, but also to many people outside the United States who might be forgiven for turning their heads and not looking at the national car wreck we Americans show no interest in avoiding.
The good news, as I suggested above, is that Americans have had a great deal of practice dealing with challenges and national car wrecks like these.
This essay begins to lay out the reasons why.
By way of illustration, we have our seemingly insatiable demand for more bad news about race in America.
Sixty years after being released from the legal constrictions that bedeviled both white and black Americans, many white people have come to believe the color that used to make them unassailable is now a sign of a moral inferiority born of a racial animus they can never wash off. Many black people, on the other hand, are insisting that America is as hopelessly stacked against them as the formerly unassailable white people’s ancestors used to tell their black ones.
The result is that many people today are buying into racist nightmares and mumbo jumbo that their black and white ancestors worked hard and effectively to put in each other’s heads.
This might be dismissed as crazy behavior if it weren’t so important to rituals Americans have long used to express their deepest fears about each other while figuring out what move they can make that won’t end with their world crashing down on everybody’s head.
Unfortunately, the kind of cultural sleight of hand we have used to ramp up our racial differences has been appropriated by people who have many other cultural fears and unresolved differences with each other. Their clumsy but culturally prescribed missteps are making all these other issues look as irremediable as our racial problems.
A good place to start an answer to how we back away from ledges is Alexis de Tocqueville’s writing on early-19th-century American democracy. He had an optimistic take on Americans’ unscripted displays of public bravado, recrimination, and payback.
For him, these were occasions when people tried to mitigate the effects of the unfair hand they were dealing someone else or had themselves been dealt by behaving in ways quite at odds with how they would otherwise be expected to act. These inversions of what Tocqueville called “the natural order of conscience” presented themselves as a loud but culturally muted challenge to the hypocrisies that people had built into the world they’d made together.
One of his favorite illustrations of early-American hypocrisy involved slave masters sleeping with their less-than-worthy slaves. To the best of my knowledge, he didn’t pick up on all the ways that slaves messed with their owners. Their well-chronicled and quiet resistance showed that even severely ill-treated people can exercise more control over their lives than outsiders appreciate.
Be that as it may, such inversions of a people’s “natural order of conscience” make a good public show of them wrestling with demons they can’t or may not want to shake off, but in any case, are nowhere close to figuring out how to cast out.
Implicit in these disruptions was the discomforting idea that people might flip the entire script and turn the world on its head in more permanent ways. That kind of flipping worked out better for us in our revolution against England than in our Civil War. These events taught us the value of stepping back from historically unprecedented ledges.
Americans of late have been giving loud expression to a long list of things they don’t like about each other and the last makeover they started but didn’t finish a half-century ago. The outcome of our fights today will be as revealing as they are embarrassing to everyone who imagined they could recast our country in a way that privileged their favorite kind of Americans.
Their disappointment with the accommodations they strike will be palpable, but the middling results they achieve with all their pushing and shoving won’t be anything they can’t live with.
Anthropologists who have written about such moments in other cultures less “advanced” than our own show that people find ways to work around their seemingly irreconcilable differences without ever fully resolving them. Indeed, the patches and repairs people make have the unheralded effect of reinforcing rather than undermining the legitimacy of the practices and values they thought were fundamentally flawed.
For example…
White guilt and black pessimism do more good than putting cash into the pockets of professional shamers and handwringers. They give the rest of us who don’t feel guilty or powerless more time to make the world less racially unequal. Good news.
Regarding illegal immigration, the entrance requirements for future immigrants will remain stringent. Americans will applaud the continued detention and deportation of the few illegal immigrants who commit serious crimes. Good news.
All the people who came to the United States without being legally vetted and were locked up for a time will be released in numbers small enough to avoid serious media attention. Along with the several million other good people who snuck in but avoided capture, the former detainees will go to school, find gainful employment, pay their taxes, and stay out of trouble. Many will eventually become citizens. Good news.
Investigations into election tampering and Donald Trump’s 2020 presidential loss will come to an unceremonious conclusion the day after his second term ends. Many Americans will grumble about this, but there will also be some quiet partying, too. Good and bad news.
Congressional hearings into all the grifting accomplished by people tied to the Trump administration will end without anyone having to pay a dime back to the American taxpayers. Bad news, we’ll learn to live with.
New laws and regulations will be created in the hope that the kind of corruption practiced by President Trump will not be repeated for another 250 years. Good news, I hope we’ll live long enough to enjoy.
Show trials for people who allegedly vandalized the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, if they happen, will get big television viewer ratings. Good news.
Trials for pardoned Capitol insurrectionists who committed serious crimes after their release should get more attention, but won’t. Bad news.
We will continue to hear nothing from most of the people who were pardoned for crimes they committed in the insurrection at the Capitol on January 6, 2021. They will keep their mouths shut and their heads down for the rest of their life. Good news.
The gold-gilded ornaments that Donald Trump had plastered all over the White House will be shipped to Mar-a-Lago, where the former president will sell them on eBay. Fun news.
American taxpayers end up paying for most of the new East Wing, the removal of the miniature gladiatorial arena that was built behind the White House, and the restoration of the White House rose garden. Bad news.
The Triumphal Arch was never built. Good news.
Trad wives and gay couples raise perfectly lovely children. Good but unsurprising news.
Trans men and women learn that most Americans can’t figure out who they used to be. No one gives a second thought to their use of “family bathrooms” or “unisex bathrooms” in public settings, businesses, and schools. Communities will sponsor athletic teams that have trans boys and girls just to show they can. Good news.
Budget deficits will be kicked down the road for someone else’s children to pay down. Bad news.
Federal agencies that had their budgets and employee ranks slashed during President Trump’s second term are getting some of the money and lost positions back. Good news.
Elite universities will buy their way out of DEI purgatory by competing for conservative scholars whose inflated salaries dwarf those of their liberal colleagues, who will think about suing their institutions for reverse discrimination but won’t be able to figure out who would pay for it or care. More fun news.
Okay. I’ve probably missed some ways that Americans will step back from the ledges they have been making noises about leaping off. But to the extent that my predictions pan out, the best and most important moral of the stories about us stepping away is this: everything we lost and took back, or had returned to us, will have happened without our government collapsing, civic traditions crumbling, or our people beating each other up.
The reason why is that the differences Americans have with each other really weren’t as irreconcilable as we made them out to be. The empty-sounding bromide that Americans have more that unites us than divides us turns out to be true, not just metaphorically but in fact.
Now that is really something to celebrate.
Daniel J. Monti (danieljmonti.com) is Professor of Sociology at Saint Louis University and the author of American Democracy and Disconsent: Liberalism and Illiberalism in Ferguson, Charlottesville, Black Lives Matter, and the Capitol Insurrection.