Senate Blocks Amendment to Protect Public Lands

Last week, the U.S. Senate voted down an amendment that would have blocked a proposal to sell public land to build affordable housing. You may have seen headlines about this, but the whole story is a little confusing, so stick with me.

A few weeks ago, some Republican senators floated the idea of selling public land and using those funds to reduce the national deficit. This isn’t a new idea, but they wanted to include it in this year’s budget bill. That’s a big deal.

Thanks to some complicated congressional rules I’m not going to explain here (mostly because I don’t quite understand them myself), the Senate only needs a simple majority to pass its budget. Most legislation requires at least 60 votes in the Senate to overcome a filibuster, but budgetary matters can be passed by a simple majority using a process called “reconciliation.”

That’s why people were taking this public lands proposal seriously. Republicans actually have enough votes to pass it if they include it in the budget bill.

This is why a group of senators proposed an amendment to the budget resolution that would have prevented the proceeds from public land sales from being used to reduce the deficit. It was a simple amendment, but it would have stopped Congress from prioritizing public land sales.

“Public lands belong to all of us,” said New Mexico Senator Martin Heinrich, one of the senators who authored the amendment. “Under the Republicans’ agenda, wealthy out-of-state landowners will be able to turn our most beloved and sacred public lands into their private resorts. Not on our watch. This is about protecting access to the places we know and love for our kids, grandkids, and generations to come.”

“Westerners know our forests, national parks, and public lands are priceless,” added Colorado Senator John Hickenlooper. “Some Republicans want to sell them off to bankroll tax cuts for the ultra-wealthy. Our public lands are not–and should not be–for sale.”

Unfortunately, that amendment didn’t pass. Two Republican senators, Montana’s Steve Daines and Tim Sheehy, voted in favor of it, but all other Republicans voted against it. One Democrat didn’t vote, so the amendment failed 51-48.

I’ve seen headlines claiming that Republicans justmade it easier for the federal government to sell public land. That’s not true. As of this writing, Congress hasn’t approved the final version of the budget resolution since both the House and Senate need to agree before anything is set in stone. And even if they agree, they’ll still need to pass the actual spending bills. We don’t know yet whether public land will be on the chopping block to reduce the deficit and offset tax cuts, so it’s still worth sending a message to your senators and representatives.

But this is definitely not a good sign. Not all Republicans want to sell off federal land, but clearly, a majority of them are fine with it. Since Republicans hold a 53-47 majority in the Senate and a seven-seat majority in the House, they have enough votes to pass this budget even if a few Republicans defect. What exactly that means for public land is still unclear, but we’ll stay on this story as it progresses.

Shop