Mark Amodei (R-NV)
Northern Nevada Economic Development and Conservation Act of 2026
A Republican bill with no cosponsors
Last activity — Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
In the other chamber's committee
Passed one chamber and has been handed to a committee in the other.
The committee decides whether it goes any further, and most bills that reach a committee never leave it. A committee that simply does nothing kills a bill without anyone ever voting against it, so no news from here is usually the news.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- Passed House voice vote
- In Senate committee
The House by voice vote (members called out yes or no together): no member's position on it was recorded.
What this bill would do
This bill, known as the Northern Nevada Economic Development and Conservation Act of 2026, deals with the transfer, sale, and management of various federal lands in northern Nevada. It authorizes multiple land conveyances to local counties, cities, the state of Nevada, and for tribal trust purposes to benefit local communities, economic development, and recreation. The legislation designates new wilderness areas and addresses flood protection, hazardous fuels management, and public infrastructure needs. It also outlines the distribution of proceeds from land sales into special accounts for conservation, education, and public projects. Finally, the bill includes provisions regarding specific local projects like the Greenlink West transmission project and a prison transfer release.
Yes· 3 of 23
- Scored +6
Would Native Americans be better off under this?
Transfers land into trust for the Washoe Tribe, takes Walker Lake Parcel into trust, and protects tribal cultural resources.
- Scored +6
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?
Promotes rural economic development, simplifies land management, and supports tribal projects in rural counties.
- Scored +6
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
Designates multiple new wilderness areas and protects natural resources through conservation conveyances.
The opposite
- Scored -3
Does this give the federal government more power?
Transfers significant amounts of Federal land and reversionary interests to state and tribal control.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Support for Local Education and County Budgets: Under Section 113(m) and Section 513(a), a portion of the proceeds from federal land sales will be directly disbursed to the State of Nevada for general education programs and to counties for general budgeting or community needs, helping fund public services for everyday citizens.
-
Tribal Trust Land Transfers: Under Section 121, the bill transfers certain federal and non-federal lands to be held in trust by the United States for the benefit of the Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California, expanding their reservation land base and supporting cultural resources and landscape restoration.
-
Enhanced Recreation and Public Parks: Under Section 114, Section 141, and Section 903, the legislation authorizes the conveyance of federal lands to local governments for use as open space recreation areas, regional public parks, trails, and public purposes, preserving outdoor access for people.
-
Flood Protection and Environmental Restoration: Under Section 303, federal land along the Truckee River is conveyed without consideration to the Truckee River Flood Management Authority to advance critical flood attenuation, riparian restoration, and community protection.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Burdensome Conveyance Costs for Local Governments: Under Section 111(c), Section 112(c), and other similar provisions throughout the bill, local governments and the State must pay all administrative costs associated with land transfers, including surveys, appraisals, and environmental cleanup, which could strain local public budgets.
-
Loss of Public Access via Land Sales: Under Section 113 and Section 511, the bill directs the competitive sale of certain public lands to private bidders or entities for fair market value, removing these formerly public tracts from public ownership and multiple-use access.
-
Wilderness Restrictions on Public Use: Under Section 131 and Section 521, the bill designates large new areas as wilderness and withdraws them from mineral leasing, mining, and general motorized entry, which may limit certain recreational or economic access methods traditionally used by the public.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Transfers land into trust for the Washoe Tribe, takes Walker Lake Parcel into trust, and protects tribal cultural resources. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Promotes rural economic development, simplifies land management, and supports tribal projects in rural counties. Would business owners be better off under this? — Promotes economic development and creates new opportunities for commercial land use and airport-related growth. Would farmers be better off under this? — Resolves checkerboard land patterns which often hinder agricultural management. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Creates new public parks and cemeteries, and develops a supplemental airport for Southern Nevada growth. Would billionaires be better off under this? — Allows for the purchase of Federal lands for private ownership. Would children be better off under this? — Increases funding for general education programs through land sale proceeds. Would high-income households be better off under this? — Provides opportunities for private land acquisition through competitive bidding. Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? — Allows for the purchase of Federal lands for private ownership. Would students be better off under this? — Supports general education funding via land sale proceeds. Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this? — Allows for the purchase of Federal lands for private ownership.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — Designates multiple new wilderness areas and protects natural resources through conservation conveyances. Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests? — Simplifies management by consolidating checkerboard lands, resolving wilderness study areas, and transferring federal land interests. Does this invest in rural communities? — Promotes economic development and land management in rural counties and tribal areas. Does this improve help for people hit by a disaster? — Conveys land specifically for flood attenuation and riparian restoration along the Truckee River. Does this improve buses, trains and other public transport? — Authorizes the development of the Southern Nevada Supplemental Airport. Does this repair or build roads and bridges? — Provides land for roadway expansion in Carson City.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to grow the economy? — Facilitates economic growth through land transfers for commercial use, tribal projects, and airport development. Is this likely to create jobs? — Authorizes land disposal for economic development and airport projects that spur local employment. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Increases available land for development and commercial use in northern Nevada. Does this reduce what the federal government owes? — Generates revenue for the Treasury through the sale of Federal lands at fair market value.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into public schools? — Allocates 5% of land sale proceeds in Douglas and Pershing counties to state general education programs.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this leave more decisions to the states? — Increases local and state autonomy over land use and economic development. Does this give the federal government more power? — Transfers significant amounts of Federal land and reversionary interests to state and tribal control.
- 9/15/2026
- Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
- 9/14/2026
- Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
- On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5586-5596)
- DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 2317.
- Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5586-5598)
- Mr. Amodei (NV) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
- 9/10/2026
- Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 119-811, Part I.
- Committee on Agriculture discharged.
- Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 710.
- 7/15/2026
- Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 23 - 12.
- 3/25/2025
- Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- Introduced in House