A contentious proposal aimed at selling off millions of acres of public lands across Western states, including significant areas in California, was removed from a Republican tax and spending bill on Monday due to conflicts with Senate rules.
Senator Mike Lee (R–Utah) had introduced a plan to sell up to 3.3 million acres of land managed by the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management, asserting it would help address housing shortages. However, critics argued that the provision’s language did not guarantee its intended outcomes.
On the same day, Elizabeth MacDonough, the Senate parliamentarian, ruled that the proposal violated the Byrd Rule, which bars the inclusion of non-budget-related provisions in reconciliation bills.
While this ruling seemed to derail Lee’s efforts, the senator quickly took to social media platform X to declare that the battle was not over.
In his post, Lee acknowledged the Byrd Rule’s restrictions but expressed his determination to support President Donald Trump and push the initiative forward. He proposed modifications to the original plan, including the removal of all Forest Service land from consideration and limiting the Bureau of Land Management land eligible for sale to areas within a five-mile radius of population centers.
Lee argued that rising housing costs were burdening young families, suggesting that his revised proposal could help alleviate some of these economic difficulties. By Tuesday morning, Lee had submitted a new plan reflecting these changes.
Environmentalists and advocates for public lands celebrated MacDonough’s decision to reject the original proposal, viewing it as a protective move for public lands but remaining wary of the ongoing attempts to revive it.
Jennifer Rokala, executive director of the Center for Western Priorities, called the parliamentarian’s ruling a significant victory for public lands.
She stated, “Thankfully, the Senate parliamentarian has seen Senator Lee’s ridiculous attempt to sell off millions of acres of public lands for what it is — an ideological crusade against public lands, not a serious proposal to raise revenue for the federal government.”
Lydia Weiss, senior director of government relations for the Wilderness Society, echoed Rokala’s sentiment, labeling the proposal’s rejection as a resounding success.
She remarked that the voices of those opposing public land sales in the West had been heard and showed little interest in any revised bill, favoring a complete abandonment of the proposal.
Prior to its removal, the measure would have rendered over 16 million acres of land in California eligible for sale.
At-risk areas included untouched stretches in the Angeles National Forest, crucial for outdoor recreation for many inhabitants of the Los Angeles Basin, as well as vital wildlife corridors. Other vulnerable regions included portions of San Bernardino, Inyo, and Cleveland national forests, along with Bureau of Land Management land in the Mojave Desert, notably the Coyote Dry Lake Bed adjacent to Joshua Tree National Park.
image source from：latimes
