BLM announces ‘significant policy shift' related to solar, wind leases
LAS VEGAS (KLAS) — Discounted leases for solar and wind projects would be rescinded under a proposal announced Wednesday by the federal government.
The U.S. Bureau of Land Management called it a 'significant policy shift' to eliminate conditions that favored renewable energy projects under the Biden administration. It has wide implications for projects in Nevada, where BLM leases provide the land for solar energy projects planned between Las Vegas and Reno, as well as elsewhere in the state.
It's not unexpected, but shows how federal agencies are implementing the sweeping executive orders that came out in the first days of the Trump administration.
'An economic blow to Nevada': Trump's executive order on energy has wide implications
'Eliminating the Biden administration's preferential treatment of unaffordable, unreliable'intermittent' projects and dismantling excessive, one-sided restrictions on traditional energy sources like oil, gas, and critical minerals, will unlock the full potential of America's natural resources,' Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum said in the announcement.
'This step will restore balance, strengthens our energy independence, and ensures taxpayers get the maximum return from the responsible use of our public lands,' he said.
Nevadans have shouldered the burden of high utility bills in recent years as natural gas prices soared, but prices dropped after a big spike in 2022. Renewable energy has become a bigger part of the electricity that NV Energy sells — rising to 47% in 2024.
The BLM news release said the move 'would eliminate rate reductions that biased renewable energy development over other energy sources, while still allowing renewables to play a part in achieving American Energy Dominance. This action would align with the direction of Executive Order 14154 and Secretary's Order 3418, Unleashing American Energy, which will reinvigorate the U.S. energy sector by creating high-paying jobs as well as safe, reliable, and robust domestic energy production on BLM-managed lands.'
BLM said it would show a commitment to 'all-of-the-above energy development that serves the national interest.'
Specifically, it proposes to rescind a rule issued on May 1, 2024.
The announcement follows a Tuesday news release that promised faster reviews of leases, reducing the entire process to six months.
The Trump administration had previously ordered environmental reviews to be less cumbersome, reducing the time allowed to complete the process.
Oil and gas leases can be competitive in some states, but a recent auction in Nevada brought only the minimum bid for most of the land available. An article posted by the advocacy group Taxpayers for Common Sense said Nevada has little potential for oil and gas development.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
7 minutes ago
Germany's Merz says he found Trump open to dialogue and committed to NATO
BERLIN -- German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said Friday, a day after meeting with President Donald Trump at the White House, that he encountered a U.S. administration open to discussion and returned confident that Washington remains committed to NATO. Merz described his Oval Office meeting and extended lunch with Trump as constructive but also candid, noting that the two leaders expressed different views on Ukraine. "Yesterday, in the meeting at the Oval Office, I expressed a distinctly different position on the topic of Ukraine than the one Trump had taken, and not only was there no objection, but we discussed it in detail again over lunch," Merz said in Berlin after his return. Thursday's White House meeting marked the first time the two sat down in person. Merz, who became chancellor in May, avoided the kind of confrontations in the Oval Office that have tripped up other world leaders, including Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelenskyy and South Africa's Cyril Ramaphosa. The two leaders opened with pleasantries. Merz presented Trump with a gold-framed birth certificate of the president's grandfather, Friedrich Trump, who emigrated from Kallstadt, Germany. Trump called Merz a 'very good man to deal with.' The American administration, he said, is open to discussion, listens, and is willing to accept differing opinions. Add he added that dialogue should go both ways: 'Let's stop talking about Donald Trump with a raised finger and wrinkled nose. You have to talk with him, not about him." He said he also met with senators on Capitol Hill, urging them to recognize the scale of Russian rearmament. 'Please take a look at how far Russia's armament is going, what they are currently doing there; you obviously have no idea what's happening,' he said he told them. 'In short, you can talk to them, but you must not let yourself be intimidated. I don't have that inclination anyway.' Merz, who speaks English fluently, stressed the need for transatlantic trust and said he reminded Trump that allies matter. 'Whether we like it or not, we will remain dependent on the United States of America for a long time,' he said. 'But you also need partners in the world, and the Europeans, especially the Germans, are the best-suited partners. 'This is the difference between authoritarian systems and democracies: authoritarian systems have subordinates. Democracies have partners — and we want to be those partners in Europe and with America.' He reiterated that the U.S. remains committed to NATO, particularly as Germany and others boost their defense spending. Trump has in the past suggested that the U.S. might abandon its commitments to the alliance if member countries don't meet defense spending targets. 'I have absolutely no doubt that the American government is committed to NATO, especially now that we've all said we're doing more. We're ensuring that we can also defend ourselves in Europe, and I believe this expectation was not unjustified," Merz said. "We've been the free riders of American security guarantees for years, and we're changing that now.'
7 minutes ago
Federal vs. state power at issue in a hearing over Trump's election overhaul executive order
BOSTON -- Democratic state attorneys general on Friday will seek to block President Donald Trump's proposal for a sweeping overhaul of U.S. elections in a case that tests a constitutional bedrock — the separation of powers. The top law enforcement officials from 19 states filed a federal lawsuit after the Republican president signed the executive order in March, arguing that its provisions would step on states' power to set their own election rules and that the executive branch had no such authority. In a filing supporting that argument, a bipartisan group of former secretaries of state said Trump's directive would upend the system established by the Constitution's Elections Clause, which gives states and Congress control over how elections are run. They said the order seeks to 'unilaterally coronate the President as the country's chief election policymaker and administrator.' If the court does not halt the order, they argued, 'the snowball of executive overreach will grow swiftly and exponentially." Trump's election directive was part of a flurry of executive orders he has issued in the opening months of his second term, many of which have drawn swift legal challenges. It follows years of him falsely claiming that his loss to Democrat Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election was due to widespread fraud and an election year in which he and other Republicans promoted the notion that large numbers of noncitizens threatened the integrity of U.S. elections. In fact, voting by noncitizens is rare and, when caught, can lead to felony charges and deportation. Trump's executive order would require voters to show proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections, prohibit mail or absentee ballots from being counted if they are received after Election Day, set new rules for voting equipment and prohibit non-U.S. citizens from being able to donate in certain elections. It also would condition federal election grant funding on states adhering to the strict ballot deadline. The hearing Friday in U.S. District Court in Boston comes in one of three lawsuits filed against the executive order. One is from Oregon and Washington, where elections are conducted almost entirely by mail and ballots received after Election Day are counted as long as they are postmarked by then. The provision that would create a proof-of-citizenship requirement for federal elections already has been halted in a lawsuit filed by voting and civil rights groups and national Democratic organizations. In that case, filed in federal court in the District of Columbia, the judge said the president's attempt to use a federal agency to enact a proof-of-citizenship requirement for voting usurped the power of states and Congress, which at the time was considering legislation that would do just that. That bill, called the SAVE Act, passed the U.S. House but faces an uncertain future in the Senate. Trump's executive order said its intent was to ensure 'free, fair and honest elections unmarred by fraud, errors, or suspicion.' The Justice Department, in arguing against the motion by the attorneys general for a preliminary injunction, said the president is within his rights to direct agencies to carry out federal voting laws. The order tasks the U.S. Election Assistance Commission with updating the federal voter registration form to require people to submit documentation proving they are U.S. citizens. Similar provisions enacted previously in a handful of states have raised concerns about disenfranchising otherwise eligible voters who can't readily access those documents. That includes married women, who would need both a birth certificate and a marriage license if they had changed their last name. A state proof-of-citizenship law enacted in Kansas more than a decade ago blocked the registrations of 31,000 people later found to be eligible to vote. The two sides will argue over whether the president has the authority to direct the election commission, which was created by Congress as an independent agency after the Florida ballot debacle during the 2000 presidential election. In its filing, the Justice Department said Trump's executive order falls within his authority to direct officials 'to carry out their statutory duties,' adding that 'the only potential voters it disenfranchises are noncitizens who are ineligible to vote anyway.'
CNN
14 minutes ago
- CNN
Trump's big bill includes an ‘unprecedented' tax credit for a national school voucher program. Here's how it would work
Part of the massive domestic policy bill currently moving through Congress known as the 'Big Beautiful Bill,' includes an unprecedented $5 billion national school voucher program. Republicans have long advocated for so-called school choice, but critics have labeled the initiative a tax cut for the wealthy. Sending public dollars to private schools has long been the subject of partisan divide and controversy. It has many powerful advocates, most notably former Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, who served under Trump during his first term. And it has fierce critics, particularly on the left. But congressional Republicans' proposal, known as the Educational Choice for Children Act (ECCA), goes beyond any previous efforts, not just by creating the first nationwide program but also by creating an unusual federal tax credit for anyone wanting to donate toward the cause. Families making up to 300% of area median income would be able to apply for, and receive, scholarships to use toward private school tuition, homeschooling books or tutoring, for example. The money would be given out by third-party scholarship granting organizations (SGOs) certified by the US Treasury and IRS. Donors would be the ones to reap the tax benefits, though. Anyone across the country – with or without kids – would be able to donate to one of these SGOs as they would to any charity. But unlike donating to a church or food bank, where tax-deductible contributions help lower total taxable income, SGO donations would result in a full tax credit, dollar for dollar, up to the greater of $5,000 or 10% of one's income. For example, $1,000 donated to an SGO would result in $1,000 taken off one's tax bill. Advocates say these incentives would strongly encourage taxpayers to contribute and that the opportunities could change the lives of kids stuck in failing public schools. 'We have what might be a once-in-a-generation opportunity this year to capitalize on what has been a real movement at the state level for school choice by creating a pathway to supercharge school choice in every state in our nation through a school choice tax credit,' wrote Tommy Schultz, CEO of American Federation for Children, in an email to CNN. Carl Davis, research director at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, says the program is generous – to say the least. 'A dollar-for-dollar charitable donation tax credit is unprecedented at the federal level,' he told CNN in an email. Furthermore, House Ways and Means committee staff verified to CNN that stocks would be accepted as donations in this proposal. Donors would receive a tax credit for the value of those stocks, without having to pay capital gains taxes that would have been required had the stock been sold instead. 'This is unbelievable,' said Sasha Pudelski, director of advocacy for AASA, The School Superintendents Association. 'It's weaponizing the tax code to code to destroy our public schools.' But Schultz said, 'These concerns are not in good faith unless those raising them have also been calling to overhaul 501c3 giving overall.' On the state level, there are similar existing tax credits for donors contributing to state school voucher programs. An ITEP study showed that for three states providing data, Arizona, Louisiana and Virginia, more than half of all voucher tax credits are flowing to families with annual incomes over $200,000. The House narrowly passed the bill, and it is now in the hands of the Senate, where its future is uncertain. If passed, the ECCA would go into effect after December 31 and would cap annual tax credits to $5 billion, with the option of increasing the cap by 5% each year. The program would sunset at the end of 2029, unless Congress renews it. Families do need more educational choices, said Robin Lake, director of the Center on Reinventing Public Education (CRPE), a nonpartisan research organization affiliated with Arizona State University. Of the various studies on school choice CRPE has done in the last 30 years, Lake said results can be mixed. She said study evidence is weak that vouchers result in better academic achievement for participating students. But Lake said there are more positive outcomes when looking at graduation rates and parent satisfaction – when school choice is done right. Lake described the pillars that make school choice most effective, which don't happen overnight: a supply of high-quality schools, incentives and startup funds for great school proposals, a pipeline to develop great educators, and accountability. 'Folks in the private school world can bristle at the idea of regulation, but in order for families to really take advantage of choice programs, they need to have some kind of information about how the schools are working,' she said. 'And I would argue that if public funds are going to support these schools, there's also a responsibility for some public accountability as well.' Accountability has become crucial, with recent investigations like one in Florida by WESH-TV, showing that 8,400 students had received reimbursements for theme park tickets through the state-funded vouchers. 'Critics are quick to point to examples of isolated waste being caught and addressed but are more hesitant to discuss the massive scope of fraud and waste documented and often unaddressed in the public education system – or the fact that public schools caught up in this type of waste often just keep getting more taxpayer dollars,' Schultz said. As written, the ECCA leaves accountability to the SGOs, who would verify and grant the use of scholarship dollars. SGOs would have to be certified by the US Treasury and IRS and would be subject to independent audit. 'Nothing is ever clean, right?' said Bridgette Garcia, a mother of four children who all graduated from St. Genevieve Parish Schools in the Los Angeles area. 'None of these different tax programs or programs within the government are (on the) up and up. But if somebody can actually benefit,' she said she would love to see that happen for families like hers, where she and her husband worked multiple jobs to afford tuition. Garcia's youngest child just graduated from St. Genevieve this June. She jokes that with tuition payments all done, her family can finally get a new car after driving the same 2007 Mercury and 2005 Torres for about 20 years. She wanted her children to have a Catholic education, 'where it's ok to say I believe in God and pray at the beginning of the day.' She was also concerned about the safety of their local public schools. Next year's tuition for St. Genevieve high school students is $13,475; elementary school tuition will be $7,550, prices Garcia says she couldn't afford if she didn't have scholarships provided by the school. But parents who are invested in their local public schools see this voucher program as a threat. 'It is sort of an abandonment of public schools,' said Maria Clark, whose two daughters are part of Daviess County Public Schools in Kentucky. Clark, who is on the board for the district foundation, said these vouchers would only exacerbate educational disparities, allowing some students to leave the public system while others may not be able to. Many private schools do not have resources to accommodate special needs students or may require certain testing or grades to be able to enroll. Some public school students, including those who are lower income – without transportation, for example - cannot simply switch to a private school if given a voucher. To those who say parents should be granted resources to put their children in better-performing private schools, Clark says, 'My argument is we can make all of those (good) things happen at public schools, and we should, because we already have money in public schools.' She worries that public schools will lose per-pupil funding as kids leave, even as parents like her already donate buckets of classroom tissues and pencils at the start of every school year. 'We have struggled to find bus drivers,' Clark said. 'Last year… we had busses doing two runs, and some of those kids would get to school an hour and a half, two hours late.' But Schultz, the school choice advocate, said that 'funneling more dollars into public schools in America does not equal improvement or make public schools the right fit for every kid.' The proposed ECCA would allow families making as much as 300% of area median income to receive scholarships. For Daviess County, that means a family of four making under $195,969 per year could still be eligible to receive scholarships for private school, using the US Census Bureau's estimates for 2019-2023. For Los Angeles County, a four-person household making under $263,280 would still be eligible. In the wealthiest county in the US, Loudoun County, Virginia, a family of four making under $536,121 could be eligible to receive scholarships for their children. The ECCA does not limit how much an SGO can give a family in scholarships. In some Democratic-leaning states like California, voters have already rejected the idea of voucher programs. If a nationwide program were to exist, it would be the first opportunity for parents in states like California to use vouchers to send children to private schools. The ECCA's donation process also benefits donors. Typically, someone who donates to a food bank or pet rescue would receive no more than 35 cents in tax savings for each dollar donated, according to ITEP. But someone who donates to private voucher groups would receive a full reimbursement for the donation, dollar for dollar. And stock donations could open up a way for wealthy donors to avoid paying capital gains taxes. ITEP estimates the bill would reduce federal tax revenue by $23.2 billion and state income taxes by $459 million over the next 10 years as currently drafted. 'There's a danger that politicians will increasingly pick and choose which kinds of donations get the best tax breaks and if your values don't align with theirs, well then you're out of luck,' ITEP's Davis wrote to CNN. Public school systems may also lose money, depending on how many students leave the district. Dr. Darin Brawley, superintendent of Compton Unified School District, said his district has already seen a 4% annual decline in enrollment as people leave the state, shrinking his budget by about $8 million per year. 'From the initial look at our enrollment trends for next year, we're already significantly behind,' Brawley said. If more students leave, Brawley worries about an 8% decline, which would result in the loss of $21.12 million and therefore layoffs, hiring freezes and bigger class sizes.
