House bill markup pushes sale of federal land for housing development

“Nevada population centers are all encumbered by federal land that can’t meet their housing and development needs without disposal of federal lands,” Amodei said during the markup, according to The Hill. “Unlike most other states, Nevadans rely on Congress to make these lands available.”

Maloy contends that the federal holdings in her state unnecessarily restrict disposition debates, particularly for issues like housing development.

“The high percentage of federal lands impacts the local government’s ability to work on economic and transportation development, manage natural resources and fully take advantage of recreational activities,” she said, according to NPR.

But the 33-page amendment stoked the ire of committee Democrats. They said the speed with which the committee was seeking to implement changes would cut out local stakeholders from the conversation.

Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) took particular aim at Amodei for not consulting the congressional delegation from Clark County, the location of much of the Nevada land at issue, which is represented by three Democrats.

“I would think at a minimum, Mr. Amodei, that you would do your colleagues in Nevada the courtesy of at least striking that language regarding Clark County, engage with your three other colleagues before this gets to the floor, and then have a conversation with them,” Neguse said, according to The Hill.

The Nevada Democrats in question — Steven Horsford, Susie Lee and Dina Titus — only learned about the amendment via text after the fact, Neguse said. The measure passed by a vote of 26-17, with one Democrat — Adam Gray (Calif.) — joining Republicans to support it.

The bill must be debated in the full House before passage.

Casey Hammond, former acting director of the U.S. Bureau for Land Management, responded to criticisms from environmentalists and Democrats who contend that wholesale transfers of land could exacerbate climate change or be made to institutional investors.

“If we’re effectively managing federal lands, there’s no reason to turn them over to states to be managed better,” Hammond told NPR. He added that the idea of wholesale transfers were not seriously entertained during the first Trump administration.

Republicans have given themselves a self-imposed July deadline to pass the president’s ambitious tax and government funding agenda. But consensus appears to be thin at this stage of the debate.