U.S. Bill Proposes Buying Greenland, Renaming It 'Red, White, and Blueland': Changes Mandated in 180 Days

The "Red, White, and Blueland Act of 2025" is a new bill that does two main things: it gives the President the green light to negotiate buying Greenland from Denmark, and it officially renames Greenland to "Red, White, and Blueland." Yep, you read that right. Section 3 of the bill mandates that all U.S. government documents, maps, and records must use the new name within 180 days of the law's passage.

Greenland's New Deal?

This bill isn't just about a name change. Section 2 specifically authorizes the President to start talks with Denmark about acquiring Greenland. While the bill doesn't lay out the purchase price or other deal terms, it's clear that the intent is a full transfer of sovereignty. If successful, this would significantly expand U.S. territory and potentially its influence in the Arctic region.

Real-World Radar

Let's break down what this could mean in practice. Imagine you're a cartographer working on updating federal maps – you've got six months to scrub every instance of "Greenland" and replace it with "Red, White, and Blueland." Or picture a government geologist – now, all your reports on Arctic resources will refer to this new name. The Secretary of the Interior, through the Board on Geographic Names, is in charge of making sure everyone in the federal government is on the same page (SEC. 3).

The Price of Patriotism

Beyond the immediate logistical scramble, there are bigger questions. Acquiring Greenland could give the U.S. access to valuable resources, but it also comes with potential costs. Think about the financial implications of the purchase itself, as well as the ongoing administrative and infrastructure expenses. There's also the matter of how this move would impact relations with Denmark and, importantly, the indigenous population of Greenland. The bill doesn't address these crucial aspects, focusing solely on the U.S. perspective and the mechanics of the name change and potential acquisition.

Renaming and Resources

It is worth noting, the act of renaming a territory, particularly one with a rich history and indigenous population, raises questions of cultural sensitivity. The bill doesn't offer a rationale for the name change beyond reflecting the bill's title. This could be perceived as dismissive of Greenland's own identity and history. Also, while the bill doesn't directly address resource exploitation, the potential for increased U.S. access to Greenland's natural resources is a significant factor to consider, especially given the environmental sensitivity of the Arctic region.