Amodei’s public land sale amendment sparks backlash from Nevada Democrats and tribal advocates

Nevada’s vast public lands, long a flashpoint in state-federal tensions, could be used to generate federal revenue under an amendment to the GOP’s comprehensive spending package.

The land sale provision, put forward by Republican Reps. Mark Amodei of Nevada and Celeste Maloy of Utah, would sell thousands of acres of public lands in the two states. This plan is raising concerns with advocates and Democrats who worry it will disrupt tribal lands, historic monuments and local projects funded through state land purchases.

The amendment would affect Clark, Washoe, Lyon, and Pershing counties.

“This is a Nevada-centric amendment drafted and requested by Nevadans,” Amodei said nearly 13 hours into a House Committee on Natural Resources hearing that bled into Wednesday morning. 

His congressional colleagues don’t agree that it’s a “Nevada-centric” pitch. The worry from Nevada Democrats isn’t new; its three House representatives and two senators have been rallying against the budget reconciliation efforts since February for its potential cuts to Medicaid. Now, Amodei’s 33-page amendment builds on those preexisting woes, with the members of Congress’ minority party warning it would disturb the status-quo of land sale money going directly towards Nevada.

“For decades, federal law has ensured that proceeds from land sales in southern Nevada stay in Nevada,” said Rep. Susie Lee, D-Nev, in a statement. “Last night’s traitorous maneuver instead would send Nevada’s land proceeds to Washington to pay for tax cuts for billionaires.”

Lee’s mention of the decades-old practice is about the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act, which enables a bargaining process with the Bureau of Land Management and use of that revenue to fund some conservation projects. Use of the act and other land-release initiatives are generally bipartisan issues — with Gov. Joe Lombardo, a Republican, working to release some of over 80% of federally-owned land for the purpose of building affordable housing. 

Amodei’s amendment progressed with a 24-19 vote, with Colorado’s Jeff Hurd as the only Republican to join the Democrats in opposition. The measure now faces a full House vote.

Amodei’s office shared maps of federal lands in areas this measure could impact, including one with public land surrounding the Pyramid Lake Paiute Reservation in northwestern Nevada. For the Native Voters Alliance of Nevada, a nonprofit advancing Native American political interests, Amodei’s amendment would complicate already-difficult land recovery efforts for the tribe. 

“You don’t accidentally mark land for disposal right next to a sovereign nation,” said the organization communications’ associate Jonnette Paddy. “You do that when they’re politically convenient to ignore.”

When Rep. Joe Neguse, D-Colo., asked if any of the House members from Clark County — Lee and fellow Democratic Nevada Reps. Dina Titus and Steven Horsford — had been consulted for the legislation, Amodei said no. 

“To basically say to them that they have no say as to what happens with respect to land conveyances in their congressional districts,” Neguse said to Amodei. “I think it is a slippery slope.”

Sen. Jacky Rosen, D-Nev., who also condemned the amendment and Amodei’s lack of consultation, said the proposal overrides the agreements from her previous bills, including her Pershing County Economic Development and Conservation Act. 

The legislation supports the Lovelock Paiute Tribe’s expansion of their Tribal cemetery alongside other protections for management of public lands and ensuring the revenue from land sales stay in Pershing County. 

It hasn’t been heard during this session of Congress, though it’s garnered support from local leaders like Chairman of the Pershing County Commission Joe Crim Jr.

“I am outraged that Congressman Amodei sold out Nevadans in the dead of night by passing a flawed, hastily-drafted proposal,” Rosen said in a statement. “.... I will not support a Washington-drafted proposal that will lead to Nevada losing out on millions of dollars in funding for our local priorities like education and restoration around the Truckee River.” 

While there wasn’t consultation with the Southern Nevada representatives, Amodei said he had been urged to put the amendment forward by the Clark County Commission “on their behalf as a member of the majority in the House.” Clark County said in a statement that it did not support the proposal. 

“The county does support efforts to maintain SNPLMA,” said Jennifer Cooper, the chief communications and strategy officer for Clark County. “But we are concerned that this bill does not reflect the Board’s priorities to facilitate responsible future development, especially as it relates to environmental conservation, water and public infrastructure.”

Native Voters Alliance of Nevada Government Relations Director Mathilda Guerrero Miller said the amendment goes beyond just Nevada and Utah — insinuating that if the land sales assured by this act are successful, Congress will look to make it a reality in other states. 

She pointed to the amendment’s late-night introduction and spot in a megabill she believes the average American wouldn’t read through as examples of how Amodei’s proposal has surpassed the process of meaningful public input.

“Tomorrow, it’s somebody else’s ceremony site. It’s somebody else’s water source, their treaty lands,” Guerrero Miller said. “And it does not stop at just the Nevada-Utah border, it’s going to go nationwide.”