Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
This bill withdraws approximately 4,288 acres of Bureau of Land Management land near Placitas, New Mexico (Tracts A–D) from mining, mineral leasing, mineral materials, and geothermal disposition, subject to valid existing rights. The Secretary may still convey the surface estate under FLPMA or the Recreation and Public Purposes Act, but any surface conveyance must reserve the mineral estate to the United States.
Environmental protection versus local economic and development interests
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly scoped substantive policy change that clearly defines its purpose and the core legal prohibitions to be imposed.
This bill withdraws approximately 4,288 acres of Bureau of Land Management land near Placitas, New Mexico (Tracts A–D) from mining, mineral leasing, mineral materials, and geothermal disposition, subject to valid existing rights.
The Secretary may still convey the surface estate under FLPMA or the Recreation and Public Purposes Act, but any surface conveyance must reserve the mineral estate to the United States.
Content is narrow and low-cost so passage is plausible, but local opposition and Senate procedure create meaningful uncertainty.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly scoped substantive policy change that clearly defines its purpose and the core legal prohibitions to be imposed. It specifies key legal mechanisms and integrates with relevant existing statutes, but it omits several implementation details commonly helpful for administrative execution (explicit map/coordinates in the text, effective date, handling of pending applications beyond 'valid existing rights'), contains no fiscal or resourcing acknowledgement, and provides no measurement or oversight requirements.
Environmental protection versus local economic and development interests
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Environmental protection versus local economic and development interests
Likely to view the bill positively as a targeted protection for public lands against extractive development.
It is seen as preserving landscape, recreation, and ecological values while keeping federal control of subsurface minerals.
Generally favorable if the bill balances conservation with respect for valid existing rights and local input.
Sees this as a narrow, administrable withdrawal but will watch for cost, legal clarity, and economic impacts.
Likely skeptical because it restricts mineral development on federal land and increases federal control over resource disposition.
Sees potential negative impacts on local jobs and property-use rights despite the limited acreage.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Content is narrow and low-cost so passage is plausible, but local opposition and Senate procedure create meaningful uncertainty.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Environmental protection versus local economic and development interests
Content is narrow and low-cost so passage is plausible, but local opposition and Senate procedure create meaningful uncertainty.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly scoped substantive policy change that clearly defines its purpose and the core legal prohibitions to be imposed. It specifies key legal mechanisms and i…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.