Subcommittee Hearings Held
This bill (Small Cemetery Conveyance Act) amends the Small Tract Act of 1983 to allow the Secretary of Agriculture to convey, without consideration, certain parcels of Federal land used or previously used as cemeteries to qualified recipients. Conveyances are limited to parcels the Secretary determines are cemeteries (defined as up to 40 acres, with an adjacent parcel of up to 1 acre allowed), and the property must be used only for cemetery purposes or may revert to the United States.
Liberals emphasize restorative justice and tribal/community control; conservatives emphasize precedent and asset-for-nothing concerns.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a focused substantive amendment that explicitly creates authority for the Secretary to convey certain cemetery parcels without consideration and includes key operational elements (use restriction, reversion, waiver authority, and definitions).
This bill (Small Cemetery Conveyance Act) amends the Small Tract Act of 1983 to allow the Secretary of Agriculture to convey, without consideration, certain parcels of Federal land used or previously used as cemeteries to qualified recipients.
Conveyances are limited to parcels the Secretary determines are cemeteries (defined as up to 40 acres, with an adjacent parcel of up to 1 acre allowed), and the property must be used only for cemetery purposes or may revert to the United States.
The Secretary may waive certain conveyance cost requirements for qualified recipients based on demonstrated need, and the bill defines "qualified person" to include State or local governments, Federally recognized Indian Tribes, and certain New Mexico community land grants (qualified land grant-merced) with a bona fide interest or historic claim.
Content and structure point toward a relatively high chance compared with major or ideologically charged bills: it's narrow, administrative, protective of tribal interests, and contains limiting provisions that reduce opposition. The principal barriers are procedural (committee time and floor scheduling) and any opposition on grounds of precedent for conveying federal land without payment. On content alone, this type of conveyance/clarifying bill often clears Congress when championed by directly affected communities and committees.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a focused substantive amendment that explicitly creates authority for the Secretary to convey certain cemetery parcels without consideration and includes key operational elements (use restriction, reversion, waiver authority, and definitions). It integrates with existing law but leaves several implementation, fiscal, and oversight details to existing authorities or future administrative action.
Liberals emphasize restorative justice and tribal/community control; conservatives emphasize precedent and asset-for-nothing concerns.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize restorative justice and tribal/community control; conservatives emphasize precedent and asset-for-nothing concerns.
A mainstream liberal would likely view the bill positively as a narrowly tailored measure to return or secure control of burial sites for tribes, local communities, and historic land grant communities.
They would emphasize that the transfer at no cost and the ability to waive conveyance costs recognize historical dispossession and practical barriers to maintaining sacred sites.
They would welcome the explicit protections limiting use to cemetery purposes and the reversion clause to prevent commercial exploitation.
A moderate would likely be generally supportive of the bill's narrow, specific purpose but would look for clear statutory guardrails and transparency to limit unintended precedents.
They would note that the authority to convey small cemetery parcels for cemetery use, combined with a reversion clause, is a reasonable administrative tool, provided the program has predictable standards and limited fiscal exposure.
They would also want clarity on how the Secretary will apply waiver authority and how conveyances will be documented and overseen.
A mainstream conservative would be cautious about authorizing free conveyances of federal land, expressing concerns about precedent, fiscal implications, and potential loss of public assets.
They would note the limited scope (cemeteries, parcels up to 40 acres, reversion clause, and narrow class of qualified recipients) as mitigating factors but would still prefer clearer safeguards to ensure transfers are necessary, documented, and limited.
Some conservatives might support transfers in cases involving tribes or clear historic claims but want requirements for transparency, strict proof of claim, and possibly compensation or congressional approval for larger or controversial conveyances.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Content and structure point toward a relatively high chance compared with major or ideologically charged bills: it's narrow, administrative, protective of tribal interests, and contains limiting provisions that reduce opposition. The principal barriers are procedural (committee time and floor scheduling) and any opposition on grounds of precedent for conveying federal land without payment. On content alone, this type of conveyance/clarifying bill often clears Congress when championed by directly affected communities and committees.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize restorative justice and tribal/community control; conservatives emphasize precedent and asset-for-nothing concerns.
Content and structure point toward a relatively high chance compared with major or ideologically charged bills: it's narrow, administrative…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a focused substantive amendment that explicitly creates authority for the Secretary to convey certain cemetery parcels without consideration and includes key opera…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.