MN House passes bill recognizing Hmong, Lao veterans of ‘Secret War'
Minnesota is on its way to officially recognizing the service of Hmong and Lao and other veterans who fought alongside the U.S. in the 'Secret War' during the 1960s and 1970s in Laos.
A veterans and military affairs bill passed by the state House on Tuesday night creates a path to grant official state veteran status for fighters recruited into Special Guerrilla Units by the CIA during the Vietnam War to fight communist forces in Southeast Asia.
The anniversary of the fall of Saigon this week marks 50 years since the U.S. ended its involvement in Vietnam, and supporters of the bill gathered at the state Capitol with surviving veterans of the Secret War to call for greater recognition.
'Today, we say their service matters, their sacrifice matters, their story is American history,' said Rep. Jay Xiong, DFL-St. Paul, co-author of the veterans bill and the son and grandson of Hmong soldiers.
He added: 'Recognizing SGUs isn't just symbolic, it's a long overdue act of respect.'
'Burden of being forgotten'
Ya Lee, a Special Guerrilla Unit veteran who flew T-28 warplanes, said there is limited time to recognize surviving veterans for their sacrifices, and that they carry the 'burden of being forgotten.'
Lee, who said he is among 10 remaining T-28 pilots living in the U.S., was among dozens of veterans at the Capitol on Tuesday who showed up in military uniforms to support the bill.
At a news conference promoting the bill, Rep. Kaohly Vang Her, DFL-St. Paul, said it's not exactly clear how many SGU veterans remain in Minnesota, but that it's likely fewer than 1,000.
During the 1960s and 1970s, many groups across Southeast Asia found themselves drawn into a U.S. war against communist forces within and beyond the borders of Vietnam.
Many faced persecution by their governments as a result, with many hundreds of thousands fleeing their homes and eventually ending up in the U.S. But official recognition for their contributions to the war efforts remained elusive for decades.
Legislation
The House passed a large veterans and military affairs bill containing the Secret War acknowledgement language by a vote of 126-6 on Tuesday, though it'll need a little more work since it differs from the version passed by the Senate. Once those have been smoothed over in a conference committee, the House and Senate will have to vote once again before it can go to Gov. Tim Walz.
If signed into law by the governor, the bill would create a definition for veterans of the Secret War in Laos and criteria for eligibility for benefits and privileges for veterans. Those include designation as a veteran on driver's licenses and ID cards, access to state veterans cemeteries, and access to preference in private employment.
Anyone who became a citizen under the Hmong Veterans Naturalization Act of 2000 will automatically get Secret War veteran status. Eligibility also extends to those who received a Medal of Honor, Purple Heart or other military award for service in support of the U.S. military operating in Laos.
Beyond immediate recognition of veterans who got citizenship for their service, the Minnesota commissioner of Veterans Affairs would be empowered to recognize veterans who served with a special guerrilla unit or other forces that operated from a base in Laos between February 1961 and May 1975.
State task force
A state task force created by the bill is charged with overseeing the process for official recognition. It is to include the Minnesota veterans commissioner, a U.S. Veterans Affairs Department official, a Hmong American Minnesota resident who served in the military, two Secret War veterans, a U.S. Vietnam veteran and other history and veterans' issues specialists.
While the bill creates a process to recognize anyone involved in the Secret War in Laos, a group backing a bill earlier this legislative session to recognize Vietnamese, Lao and Cambodian veterans expressed disappointment that language didn't mention those groups by name.
Bana Soumetho, who was born to Lao refugee parents in Thailand and has been working to establish explicit recognition for a broader group of Secret War veterans in state law, expressed her frustration in an email.
'This year marked what may have been the final meaningful opportunity for many of our aging veterans to receive public acknowledgment,' she wrote. 'Instead, it became a painful reminder of how easily their stories can be overlooked — even when the intent is recognition.'
___
© 2025 MediaNews Group, Inc.
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
How Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill' Could Impact Skiing
On Wednesday, June 11, 2025, the US Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee published a provision to the current reconciliation bill that was introduced by the House earlier this year. The bill is referred to as the 'One Big Beautiful Bill' by President Donald bill and its provision introduce a number of polarizing policies on things like funding for environmental and land management agencies, as well as the sale of huge parcels of public lands, which has a potentially massive impact on outdoor recreation in the US. One of the key points in the bill's most recent provision mandates the sale of between 0.5% and 0.75% of the 193 million acres of land managed by the US Forest Service, and 245 million acres managed by the BLM for housing development. In total, the bill references between roughly 2.2 million and 3.3 million acres of land split between BLM (1.23-1.84 million acres), and the Forest Service (between 956,000 and 1.45 million acres) that would be sold across 11 western states including Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Utah, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, New Mexico, Nevada and what does this mean for skiers? Keep reading for to keep up with the best stories and photos in skiing? Subscribe to the new Powder To The People newsletter for weekly updates. According to a fact sheet issued by the Committee, which is led by Utah Senator Mike Lee, the sale excludes the sale of National Parks, National Monuments, National Recreation Areas, components of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, National Wildlife Refuge System, National Fish Hatchery Systems, Wilderness Preservation Areas, and 'nearly every other protected designations.''This is not about our most sacred and beautiful places. This is often about barren land next to highways with existing billboards that have no recreational value', said Interior Secretary Doug Burgum. The fact sheet also notes that the US Department of the Interior estimates that the BLM has 1.2 million acres of land within a mile of a population center and another 800,000 acres between one and five miles of a population center. The Forest Service has another million acres within one mile of population centers, all which may qualify for 'disposal.' While lands like those in our National Parks and Monuments are protected under their current federal designations, a recent Justice Department opinion means that the President is allowed to both designate and repeal National Monuments, and their land protections, without a vote from Congress, per the Antiquities Act. President Trump is no stranger to the Act, as he significantly reduced the size of Bear's Ears National Monument in Utah in 2017, in what was the largest reversal of federal land protections in U.S. history. A map released by the Wilderness Society shows the large splotches of Forest Service and BLM land that could be included in these disposals across the 11 western states. A quick scroll through the map (included at the top of this article) shows the footprints of many ski areas covered by the green overlay of Forest Service land. While the protections of National Parks and National Monuments feel precarious under the bill and the current administration, the fact sheet does note that land with valid existing use permits cannot be sold as part of the it pertains to skiing, many ski areas in the US operate on Forest Service land with a Ski Area Term Special Use permit, created under the National Forest Ski Area Permit Act of 1986. Section IV of this permit notes that these permits qualify as valid existing rights, making it highly unlikely, at least in the bill's current state, that any of the Forest Service lands that ski areas are on such as Mt. Bachelor, Arapahoe Basin, Mt. Hood, Steamboat, Keystone, Copper, and more could be sold and developed. So, while the current provision to the bill might not threaten ski area footprints themselves, there are other pieces of the bill that would certainly have an effect on skiing, and more broadly, the use of our public lands for recreation. For one, land near ski resorts doesn't necessarily fall under the rights of a Ski Area Special Use permit, and could hypothetically be sold. The fact sheet says that 'the proposal prioritizes lands that are nominated by States or units of local governments; are adjacent to existing developed areas; have access to existing infrastructure; are suitable for residential housing; reduce checkerboard land patterns; or are isolated tracts that are inefficient to manage.' However, with a number like 2.2 million acres as the minimum number of land acreage mandated to be sold in the bill, there is a distinct possibility that the footprint of lands sold would bleed beyond those dubbed 'prioritized' by the proposal. Given the bill's $29 billion in expected revenue, and an emphasis on building housing, a resource that can be sparse in mountain towns that are often bordered by expanses of Forest Service and BLM land, the idea that precious wilderness would be sold is not remotely impossible. Along with the potential sale of lands managed by The Forest Service, proposed funding would also be rescinded for a number of Forest Service programs, including the protection of old growth forests. These budget cuts to the US Forest Service could be up to $392 million in management alone, and another $391 million to Forest Service operations budgets in an effort to 'restore federalism by empowering states to assume a greater role in managing forest lands within their borders.' Additionally, Interior Secretary Burgum is pushing for a bill that would cut $900M in funding for the National Park Service, which would potentially lead to the closure of up to 350 sites managed by the National Park Service, and the cutting of 5,000 full-time Park Service rescinding of funds for the National Park System and Bureau of Land Management would also impact funding for the carrying out of projects concerning the conservation, protection, and resiliency of lands and resources managed by the two agencies, as well as for certain conservation and habitat restoration projects on NPS and BLM Lands. In total, the administration's 2026 budget recommendations would cut around a billion dollars from the NPS. 'Isn't it a betrayal of the relationship (between Congress and the Forest Service) to be cutting programs in half in preparation for shutting them down completely when the vision has not been laid out by Congress to do so?' said Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley, who also expressed concern over a reorganization of the country's firefighting teams, an issue close to the hearts of many Oregonians. Beyond the bill's provision on public lands, there are other facets of the bill that have potentially catastrophic long term effects on our climate. As skiers, we know that climate change is already a threat to our winters, livelihoods, and passed, the bill would rescind funding for a number of government agencies and programs that monitor and collect data on climate change-related metrics, as well as for federally funded conservation programs. Specifically, the bill rescinds funding to implement the EPA's addressing of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), a commonly used component in traditional ski waxes that have been found to have significant negative environmental impacts. The bill would also rescind funding for the Council on Environmental Quality as it pertains to collecting data related to environmental and climate issues, amongst other things. Funding for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and USGS, whose work is essential in weather forecasting and studying climate change, would be rescinded. This could be detrimental to certain communities when preparing for extreme weather summarize, the bill and provision in question have the potential for a massive reduction in size to public lands used for recreation, like skiing, and funding cuts to government led research and management of climate change, that could have significant impacts on the planet's rapidly warming climate. Conservation groups such as the Outdoor Alliance and Protect Our Winters, as well as a slew of brands, athletes, and outdoor climate activists in skiing have taken to social media to share information and encourage the public to contact their Senate representatives with their opinions on the bill passed in The House on May 22, 2025, and is now up for debate in the Senate. President Trump is reportedly hoping for a Senate vote to take place by July 4, 2025, but any number of things could delay that vote. If passed, the bill would be sent back to the House for approval before being sent to the oval office to be Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill' Could Impact Skiing first appeared on Powder on Jun 18, 2025
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Skiers Consider Boycotting Utah
As always, skiers on Reddit have all kinds of opinions, however wild they may or may not be. This week, r/skiing's keyboard warriors have decided to address the current reconciliation bill up for debate in the US Senate and the provision to it, which amongst other things, would mean the potential sale of a few million acres of US public lands. One particularly fired-up skier has taken to r/skiing to say that in light of the bill, Utah skiers should start boycotting the state. For context, the bill's provision that concerns the sale of public lands was published by the US Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, which is led by Republican Utah Senator Mike Lee."It's time to boycott Utah. Utah Sen. Mike Lee wants to sell millions of acres of public land. He needs to feel it where it hurts the most: his economy," the post by Reddit user Hobbitsliketoparty, is titled. Want to keep up with the best stories and photos in skiing? Subscribe to the new Powder To The People newsletter for weekly updates. The post details that, indeed, up to 3.3 million acres of US public lands would be sold across 11 western states, including Utah. In Utah specifically, this could include land near Big and Little Cottonwood Canyons, Millcreek, Parley's, and more BLM land close to some of Utah's National Parks like Zion and Arches. Under the provision, National Parks, National Monuments, National Recreation Areas, components of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, National Wildlife Refuge System, National Fish Hatchery Systems, Wilderness Preservation Areas, and 'nearly every other protected designations,' would be excluded from the sale. Land sold under the bill would be for the purpose of building housing in order to ease housing shortages in the US. u/Hobbitsliketoparty has done their research, because they also state that 'but there's no requirement that the land be used for affordable housing. Developers and private buyers could snap up access points, trailheads, and wild spaces. That access could be gone for good.'The bill's provision has some vague language about proposals to purchase the land would need to include a description of how intended development would address local housing needs, including supply and affordability. However, there's no stipulation on holding the proposer to that once the sale is carried out. Considering Utah Senator Mike Lee's creation and support of the bill, u/Hobbitsliketoparty is proposing a boycott of funding to Utah's outdoor economy in protest. "If we let this happen, it sets a dangerous precedent. Politicians should not be allowed to auction off public land with almost no public input. And Utah has a history of this. From shrinking Bears Ears to resisting wilderness protections, they've been chipping away for years. If Utah's leadership insists on selling out our public lands, we should stop funding their outdoor economy. That means skipping the ski trips. Skipping the canyoneering. Skipping the visits to the Mighty 5. In 2017, Outdoor Retailer pulled its convention out of Salt Lake City after similar attacks on public land. It worked. Maybe it's time we acted again," reads the post. Several commenters point out and thank u/Hobbitsliketoparty for doing their research and reiterate the fact that while many of Utah and other state's ski areas are on public lands, often managed by USFS, the permits they operate on also exempt them from the sale. But that doesn't mean that trailheads and access points for other, non-inbounds skiing recreation wouldn't be threatened by the sale. It's hard to say whether boycotting skiing in Utah and the rest of its outdoor tourism economy would send the right message to Sen. Lee. For one, the Senate vote is slated to take place sometime in the next few weeks, which means, by the time ski season rolls around, there will already be a decision. Also, food for thought—boycotting Utah's outdoor tourism economy as a revenue source for the state would potentially fuel supporter's of the bill's fire by giving them more ammunition to sell off public lands. But I get it, u/Hobbitsliketoparty is angry like a lot of Americans right now about this potential attack on our public lands, but rather than boycotting a local tourism industry, the best course of action would be to call your local senators and let them know you oppose the bill, or use a handy form from an organization like the Outdoor Alliance or Protect Our Winters to do Consider Boycotting Utah first appeared on Powder on Jun 20, 2025
Boston Globe
2 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Still marching after all these years
Many of us have had a lot of practice: Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq. We protested every bad government action. Advertisement I learned nonviolent civil disobedience from my parents, growing up in Brooklyn. They were activists even before Vietnam. During the civil rights movement, in 1964, driving through St. Augustine, Fla., they attended a demonstration. When protesters refused to leave a sit-in attempting to integrate the Ponce de Leon Motor Lodge restaurant, some were arrested and jailed. My parents were not arrested, but they were present, in solidarity, as lifelong believers in human rights, in including Black Americans in the American Dream. What we now call DEI was already a good goal. Advertisement And me? Young as I was, my good-girl head was down, finishing my master's thesis on Proust, in graduate school far away. I was merely an educated girl, not political yet, not focused on the common good as they were. Both of them had been radicals in the 1930s, when Jewish leftists and others hoped that a popular front could remake US labor relations, control capitalist greed, and bring America closer to equality for women and people of color. Paul Robeson was one of their idols, along with Eleanor Roosevelt. Later, they opposed the Vietnam War, just as my husband and I did. In 1968, running against feckless Hubert Humphrey, treacherous Richard Nixon promised to end the war, and then prolonged it until more than 50,000 men my age died, as well as countless Vietnamese and Cambodians. In 1972 my father worked to elect Elizabeth Holtzman, also of Brooklyn, to Congress. So she was in the House of Representatives in time to vote to impeach the corrupt Nixon in the summer of 1974. My father, with ALS sapping his body, had followed the investigation and trial avidly from the green couch in the living room. But he missed out on the ending. By August he was in a coma; he died two days short of Nixon's ignominious exit. The night Nixon left, making his awkward, hypocritical peace signs, my mother and I were dining in the dim kitchen with my cousin Sherry, grieving and rejoicing. In that painful, complex mood, we poured some wine and drank to him: 'Marty should have been here to see this day.' 'Daddy should have been here.' Advertisement I know my parents would be out with me on the streets now. They were there, in a sense — at a #HandsOff rally on April 5 in Newton, at an April 19 event to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the beginning of the American Revolution in Waltham, and then at the 'No Kings' rally. The signs were clever and scathing at all these events; drivers going by were honking in approval, shouting, applauding. My laconic father's sign would have said, very big, in block letters, 'NO!' Once when my mother was in her 90s and had lost many memories, I asked her, 'What is wisdom?' She answered unhesitatingly: 'The greatest part of wisdom is kindness.' Her sign, which I saw an older woman hold at the Waltham rally, would have read 'Make America kind again.' 'Nothing is stranger than the position of the dead among the living,' Virginia Woolf wrote in her first, unpublished novel, 'Melymbrosia.' I find it marvelous that my parents can still stand by my side. The rest of our family is in the streets, too: our son and his children in New York City. That solidarity is so welcome to us — just as it must have been to my parents when we opposed the Vietnam War early on, when they felt alone and scorned, when so few Americans had yet come to their senses. Advertisement Intergenerational solidarity is precious. That preciousness includes not only the next generations, but the oldest, too. To all of us lucky enough to have older people in our lives, they comfort us by their presence. Repositories of family lore and legend, they dole out secrets and, for better or worse, guide us by their experiences. And sometimes by the energy of their activism, right now! I see my parents' faces vividly. I summon them and their will to do good, which survives them, in this national emergency. Their memory is a blessing in the here and now and the strife to come.
