Harriet Hageman (R-WY)
To authorize leases of up to 99 years for land held in trust for federally recognized Indian Tribes.
A Republican bill with 2 Democratic cosponsors · See all 4 cosponsors
Last activity — Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs.
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 seeks to authorize the leasing of land held in trust for federally recognized Indian Tribes. It specifically amends the Act of August 9, 1955. The amendment allows for leases of up to 99 years for land held in trust for any Indian Tribe included on the list published by the Secretary. This change expands the existing authority regarding land held in trust.
Yes· 3 of 10
- Scored +6
Would Native Americans be better off under this?
This bill provides significant economic and land management advantages to federally recognized Indian Tribes.
- Scored +5
Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated?
Expanding leasing authority empowers federally recognized tribes to manage and utilize their land assets more effectively.
- Scored +4
Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests?
The bill enhances the ability of tribes to manage and lease land held in trust for extended periods.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this give the federal government more power?
The bill expands federal authority to manage leasing terms for tribal land.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Expanded Leasing Authority: The bill amends the Act of August 1955 to include land held in trust for any Indian Tribe on the Secretary's published list, which expands the scope of what can be leased (Section 1).
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? — This bill provides significant economic and land management advantages to federally recognized Indian Tribes. Would business owners be better off under this? — The expanded lease terms provide greater long-term certainty for businesses operating on tribal lands. Would farmers be better off under this? — Longer lease terms may benefit agricultural enterprises on tribal lands. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Land use authority can drive development in rural tribal areas.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests? — The bill enhances the ability of tribes to manage and lease land held in trust for extended periods. Does this invest in rural communities? — Expanding lease terms facilitates long-term infrastructure and land development on tribal lands.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — Expanding leasing authority empowers federally recognized tribes to manage and utilize their land assets more effectively. Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Greater land use authority can potentially support tribal economic development and revenue generation.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to create jobs? — Expanding land lease durations may encourage long-term commercial and economic development on tribal lands. Is this likely to grow the economy? — The ability to secure long-term leases provides more stability for economic activity on tribal lands.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill expands federal authority to manage leasing terms for tribal land.
- 3/4/2026
- Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs.
- 3/3/2026
- 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 Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H2348)
- On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H2348)
- DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5910.
- Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2348-2349)
- Mr. Westerman moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
- 1/14/2026
- Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 119-453.
- Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 388.
- 12/17/2025
- Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
- 12/16/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 12/11/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 12/5/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 11/4/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Yassamin AnsariDemocrat · Arizona
Jeff HurdRepublican · Colorado
Teresa Leger FernandezDemocrat · New Mexico
Doug LaMalfaRepublican · California