The Conservation Lands Foundation Opposes Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act
Proposal as written decimates core cultural and environmental safeguards.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - October 29, 2026
Contact:
Kris Deutschman, Conservation Lands Foundation, 505-498-0212;
kris@conservationlands.org
WASHINGTON, D.C. - After careful review of the recently introduced S.5653 the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act, the Conservation Lands Foundation opposes the bill as written because it would weaken core cultural resource and environmental safeguards that protect the integrity of the National Conservation Lands — the 38-million-acre system of national monuments, national conservation areas, wilderness, wilderness study areas, wild and scenic rivers, and national trails managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).
“While the bill does not mention the National Conservation Lands by name and contains no Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) amendments, its procedural rewrites would apply directly to BLM authorizations and impact treasured landscapes, including future additions to the National Conservation Lands,” said
Chris Hill, CEO of the Conservation Lands Foundation, which represents a nonpartisan, national network of community advocates solely focused on the public lands overseen by the Bureau of Land Management.
“If the proposal were to pass in its current form, it would result in cursory review of impacts to cultural resources and Tribal cultural values on public lands during environmental review of industrial projects; allow the federal government to rubber stamp destructive projects on landscapes without sufficient analysis of the impacts on wildlife and communities; and remove options for the public to engage in the process.
“Our nation’s public lands have faced countless assaults during this Congressional session. We should be strengthening safeguards to prevent future attacks instead of widening loopholes to be exploited for private gain. Therefore, the Conservation Lands Foundation opposes S. 5653 in its current form and urges Congress not to advance it without removing or fundamentally revising the Historic Preservation title and several other sections which weaken meaningful cultural resource consultation, science-based environmental review, and endangered species safeguards for the National Conservation Lands,” said Hill.
###
