Plans to Sell Millions of Acres of Federal Land Dropped
Republican Senator Mike Lee of Utah, who chairs the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, preemptively pulled his provision from the tax and spending bill on Saturday. This means that efforts to mandate federal land sales for development and housing have been dropped from the bill.
The move followed days of backlash from the public and lawmakers as well as warnings of rule violations from the Senate parliamentarian.
Newsweek has contacted Lee for comment via email outside regular working hours.
The U.S. government manages about 28 percent of the nation's land, much of which is concentrated in Western states. Those in support of the sale of federal land, including Trump, framed the provision as a means to generate revenue and ease the housing shortage.
However, conservation organizations, Republican lawmakers and residents argued that the plan risked environmental harm without solving affordability concerns. The rift showed the struggle within the GOP over balancing property rights, local control and land stewardship.
Lee's proposal would have allowed the sale of 2 million acres of land managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U.S. Forest Service (USFS) over the next five years.
The goal, Lee previously said on social media, was to promote affordable housing development and give land back to American families. However, critics of the proposal raised concerns that the land could be sold to the highest bidder or to foreign governments rather than be given to local and rural communities.
After the Senate parliamentarian ruled that the provision violated regulations governing reconciliation bills, Lee revised the legislation so that fewer acres of BLM-managed land would be sold and no USFS-managed land would be sold.
Despite making these changes and others, he withdrew the proposal entirely over the weekend.
Lee said in a statement posted on X, formerly Twitter, on Saturday: "Over the past several weeks, I've spent a lot of time listening to members of the community, local leaders, and stakeholders across the country. While there has been a tremendous amount of misinformation—and in some cases, outright lies—about my bill, many people brought forward sincere concerns."
In a previous comment, he said he wanted the land to be sold to the American people, "not foreign governments, not the Chinese Communist Party, and not massive corporations looking to pad their portfolios."
He added in his statement on Saturday that the reason he withdrew the proposal from the bill was because of the "constraints of the budget reconciliation process," which meant that he was "unable to secure clear, enforceable safeguards to guarantee that these lands would be sold only to American families—not to China, not to BlackRock, and not to any foreign interests."
The proposal faced criticism from environmental groups and public land advocates, who warned it could open up as many as 250 million acres for eventual sale that would harm wildlife and recreation access.
A number of Republican senators also spoke out against the legislation, including Senators Steve Daines and Tim Sheehy of Montana and Jim Risch of Idaho.
Senator Mike Lee of Utah said in a statement posted on X: "I continue to believe the federal government owns far too much land—land it is mismanaging and in many cases ruining for the next generation. Under Democratic presidents, massive swaths of the West are being locked away from the people who live there, with no meaningful recourse. That has real consequences for Utahns—from raising taxes for schools and funding local search-and-rescue operations, to being able to build homes and sustain rural communities."
Senator Steve Daines of Montana wrote on X: "I always have and always will be against the sale of public lands. @TimSheehyMT & I worked together to block this provision from being included in the Senate reconciliation bill and I will always fight for our MT outdoor way of life."
Senator Tim Sheehy of Montana wrote on X: "The entire Montana delegation has been united on this since Day One: public lands belong in public hands."
Senator Jim Risch of Idaho wrote on X: "Senator Lee has withdrawn the sale of public lands provision. The people of Idaho have been clear—we do NOT support the sale of our public lands to the highest bidder. I am proud to help lead the effort to remove this provision from the One Big Beautiful Bill."
Senate Republicans continue working to send Trump's legislative agenda to his desk ahead of the July 4 deadline. While the land sale proposal is off the table for now, Lee has indicated that he intends to advocate for changes in federal land management in future legislation.
Related Articles
Plan To Sell 250 Million Acres of Public Land Suffers Major SetbackFlorida Adding New Criminal Penalty for Dangerous Speeding From July 1Does the US Fund the Taliban? What We Know as House Passes BillMissouri Proposes Property Tax Changes: What To Know
2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
16 minutes ago
- Fox News
US-Russian ballerina reflects on release from Russian penal colony
Former ballerina Ksenia Karelina, whom Russia sentenced to 12 years on a penal colony over a treason conviction, tells 'My View' her experience and what it was like to meet President Donald Trump.
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Eleven more die from malnutrition in Gaza, Hamas-run health ministry says
A further 11 deaths resulting from malnutrition have been reported in Gaza, according to the Hamas-run health ministry. That brings the total number of malnutrition-related deaths to 212, including 98 children. At least 38 people have also been killed and 491 injured as a result of Israeli military activity over the past 24 hours, the health ministry said. Deaths continue to rise amid reports that a deadline of 7 October 2025 has been set for residents to evacuate Gaza City following the announcement of a controversial Israeli plan to take control of the area. The new plan, approved by the Israeli security cabinet and detailed on Friday, lists five "principles" for ending the war in Gaza, with one being "taking security control of the territory". Reports in Israeli media say the plan initially focuses on taking full control of Gaza City, relocating its estimated one million residents further south. The plan has been met with criticism from world leaders as well as fierce opposition from some within Israel, including from military officials and the families of hostages still being held in Gaza who fear for their safety. Israel has rejected criticism, with Defence Minister Israel Katz saying condemnation would "not weaken our resolve". The US has been less critical - with Donald Trump saying earlier in the week that it was "pretty much up to Israel" whether to fully occupy the Gaza Strip. What we know about Israel's plan to take over Gaza City Watch: What Israel's Gaza City takeover plan could mean for Palestinians Israel rejects international criticism of Gaza City takeover plan Israeli media reports that the government has set a two-month deadline before a military siege of Gaza City to begin on 7 October 2025, the two-year anniversary of the beginning of the war. Within those two months, Israel plans to forcibly displace the estimated one million Palestinians living in Gaza City, roughly half the number of people living in the entirety of the territory. Gaza City is the capital of the Gaza Strip. Its pre-war population was estimated at around 600,000 people, but that number has grown significantly throughout the war as Israel's military campaign has pushed Palestinians into the city. Many living there now have already been displaced multiple times through the war and are living in tents or the ruins of buildings that have been partially destroyed by Israeli air strikes. Israeli media reports that the military would move the population towards al-Mawasi, a vast tent encampment in the south of Gaza, already home to thousands of Palestinians suffering from an absence of basic facilities and sanitation. The plan is being widely condemned by humanitarian agencies and indeed many of Israel's allies for its potential to add untold human suffering onto the shoulders of an already exhausted and beleaguered people. The move to take control of Gaza City will further complicate Palestinians' ability to meet their basic needs for survival. Famine is already playing out throughout the Gaza Strip, with a UN-backed global food security experts saying the "worst-case scenario of famine is currently playing out". The UN's humanitarian agency said on Friday that the amount of aid entering Gaza continues to be "far below the minimum required to meet people's immense needs". Israel has denied there is starvation in Gaza and accused UN agencies of not picking up aid at the borders and delivering it. The UN's humanitarian agency said it continues to see impediments and delays as it tries to collect aid from Israeli-controlled border zones. Challenges in distributing aid persist as deaths of people trying to get food continue to be reported. Gaza's health ministry said on Saturday that 21 people had been killed trying to get aid in the last 24 hours. The UN reported earlier this month that 1,373 Palestinians have been killed seeking food since late May, when a new US and Israeli-backed organisation Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) set up aid distribution sites. The UN said most were killed by the Israeli military, with 859 killed near GHF sites and 514 along the routes of food convoys. The GHF denies the UN's figure. Israel has accused Hamas of instigating chaos near the aid centres and says its forces do not intentionally open fire on civilians. Israel does not allow the BBC and other news organisations to report independently from Gaza, making it difficult to verify. In its announcement of the plan to conquer Gaza City, Israel's prime minister's office said it will provide "humanitarian aid to the civilian population outside the combat zones", but did not provide further information of what that might entail. Like previous forced displacements throughout the war, the expulsion of Palestinians will likely see chaotic and dangerous scenes of families travelling by foot, by cart or by overloaded vehicles. It has been reported that after the deadline of 7 October 2025, Israel's military will lay siege to Gaza City and escalate its attacks. Hamas has promised to fiercely resist Israel's attempt to conquer the city. We may also see similar scenes to what the military has done in Rafah, in Gaza's south, and in northern towns, which were forcibly evacuated before being almost totally levelled in a systematic method. If there are Hamas fighters holding Israeli hostages in Gaza City, then this period would prove the most deadly. It is understood that Hamas has given orders to captors to kill hostages should Israeli military troops approach close to hiding locations. An estimated 20 Israeli hostages remain alive in Gaza, some of whom are believed to be held around Gaza City. Israel began its military offensive in Gaza after the Hamas-led attacks on Israel on October 7 2023, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 others were taken hostage. Since then, more than 61,300 people have been killed in Gaza as a result of Israeli military operations. Israel and the Palestinians: History of the conflict explained Israel's Gaza City plan means more misery for Palestinians and big risk for Netanyahu
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Elon Musk's America Party is nowhere to be seen 1 month later
Elon Musk said he would be forming a new political party on July 5. One month later, he hasn't taken the formal steps to do so. He's also remained a major GOP donor, even amid his feud with Trump. Elon Musk hasn't gone "founder mode" on building the America Party just yet. On July 5, enraged by the passage of the "Big Beautiful Bill" and encouraged by the results of an online poll, Musk said he would form a new political party in the United States. Over a month later, he hasn't taken any of the formal steps necessary to do so, and he hasn't publicly mentioned the idea in weeks. That's despite praise from Mark Cuban and a warning from the head of the Democratic Party that Musk's effort should be "taken seriously." In the meantime, several polls have indicated that while many Americans are hungry for a third party, far fewer are interested in one founded by Musk. This week, one of his top aides at both DOGE and xAI announced that she was breaking off to start her own podcast. Musk has also remained a major GOP donor as he's toyed with the idea of starting a third party and feuded with President Donald Trump, according to campaign finance records made public at the end of July. The tech titan gave a total of $15 million to several GOP super PACs on June 27, including: $5 million to MAGA Inc, which supports Trump; $5 million to the Senate Leadership Fund, which supports GOP senators and Senate candidates; $5 million to the Congressional Leadership Fund, which supports Republican House members and candidates. Those donations came just days before Musk said he'd form the America Party — and weeks after he first floated the idea at the beginning of his feud with Trump. "Is it time to create a new political party in America that actually represents the 80% in the middle?" Musk asked his followers on June 5. All of this isn't to say that Musk couldn't pivot back to the project at some point. And if he did, he'd be joining a club of businessmen who've tried to take on the two-party system over the years. It takes a lot to stand up a new political party, including filing paperwork with the Federal Election Commission, collecting signatures to get on the ballot in various states, and recruiting candidates to run in House and Senate races next year. In other words, it's a resource-intensive and time-consuming process, and there's little indication that Musk has undertaken it. Musk did not respond to BI's request for comment for this story. Musk, the world's richest man, is known to go "founder mode" on things that he cares deeply about, devoting extraordinary amounts of energy and time to projects and even sleeping at the office. He did it when he took over Twitter, now known as X. He's done it at Tesla. He did it when he went all-in on supporting Trump in 2024. And he brought that same approach to DOGE, until he began winding down his involvement in late April. If Musk is serious about standing up a new party, we might expect him to bring that same "founder mode" approach to this venture. But so far, it hasn't happened. Read the original article on Business Insider
