Category: Uncategorized

Earlier this week, the Senate voted 73-25 to advance and open debate on the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act (BAAJA, S. 5653, H.R 2347). This vote is extremely disappointing, but the fight is not over. While the bill’s lead sponsors negotiated some modest changes to the bill’s historic preservation title ahead of that vote, these changes did not go nearly far enough and left the bill’s central flaws in place.

A group of Senators led by Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) has proposed an amendment that would remove the harmful historic preservation title entirely.

This bill presents the biggest threat to the National Historic Preservation Act in the law’s 60 year history.

The Senate is expected to hold a final vote on the bill as soon as next week, Congress needs to hear from you!

TAKE ACTION TODAY!

1. Call your Senators. Dial 202-224-3121, ask for your Senator’s office, and say you’re a constituent. Urge them to support Sen. Schiff’s amendment to strike harmful historic preservation provisions from the permitting bill. If the amendment is not adopted, ask them to VOTE NO on the final bill!

Script: “Hello, my name is [NAME], and I’m a constituent from [CITY/TOWN]. I’m calling to urge [SENATOR NAME] to support Sen. Schiff’s amendment to strike Title III, the historic preservation title, from the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act, and to VOTE NO on the final bill if the amendment is not adopted. These dangerous provisions would decimate preservation reviews, shut out state, Tribal, and local voices, and put historic places in our community directly in harms way.

This bill will lead to more conflict and more delay, while having devastating consequences on the historic places that power tourism and local economies. The bill was written behind closed doors and is being rushed to a vote without hearings.

I urge the Senator to support Sen. Schiff’s amendment to strike Title III from the permitting bill and VOTE NO on the final bill if the amendment is not adopted. Thank you for your consideration”

2. Send an email. Preservation Action has made it easy for you to edit and send a letter to your members of Congress TODAY. It only takes a couple of minutes. If you have personal contact in your Senator or Representative’s office, reach out to that person directly.

Send Your Letter →

3. Thank Senators who voted no. If your Senator voted no on the motion to proceed to BAAJA, be sure to thank them! [See the list →]

4. Forward this alert to your members and partners.

Additional talking points

• It shuts communities out. It weakens consultation with State and Tribal Historic Preservation Offices and lets federal agencies override preservation concerns on their own.
• It means less review. Nearly all federally funded projects would be exempt, and many visual, atmospheric, and audible impacts wouldn’t count as harm.
• It won’t make permitting faster. Cutting out the people who know these places best means more conflict and more delay.
• It was rushed. It was written behind closed doors, with no committee hearing and no input from the preservation community.

The Senate is moving fast, and so must we. If the lines are busy, keep calling. If you’ve already reached out, reach out again. Every call and email counts before next week’s vote!

Yesterday the Senate voted 73-25 to advance and open debate on the legislative vehicle for the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act (BAAJA, S. 5653). The vote was opposed by 24 Democrats and 1 Republican. Preservation Action is dismayed by this vote. We remain committed to fighting this harmful legislation and defending the National Historic Preservation Act.

While this vote is a setback, the process is far from over. The vote allows for the bill to be debated and amended, but it is not the final vote. In fact some Senators may vote to open to debate, but still end up opposing the final bill. Our fight continues!

Ahead of vote, Preservation Action joined hundreds of advocates for the 106 Strong Coalition Rally outside the capitol, who made their opposition to this harmful bill known. We appreciate the work of the coalition in organizing the rally and all of those that showed up and spoke out.

We need you to keep up your advocacy! A final Senate vote could come as soon as next week and Congress needs to continue to hear from you.

Reach out to your Senators and Representatives and tell them to oppose the bill! Or encourage them to pass an amendment to completely strike the Title III historic preservation provisions. Check out our action alert to see phone scripts, send emails to your members of Congress, and learn more about this harmful bill.

---

We also encourage you to be sure to thank those 25 Senators that stood up and voted against this harmful permitting bill and encourage them to talk to their colleagues about their concern.

Senators who voted NO on the motion to proceed to BAAJA:

Preservation Action remains strongly opposed to the harmful preservation provisions in the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act (S. 5653), as revised by the manager’s amendment released over the weekend. This bill is severely flawed and would have a devastating impact on core historic preservation protections afforded by the National Historic Preservation Act.

The amendment makes some modest changes, but it leaves the bill’s central flaws in place. The bill continues to completely cut the public out of the process and fundamentally weaken meaningful consultation with states and tribes. Federal officials would still have the unilateral authority to set aside mitigation whenever they decide other considerations outweigh historic preservation. Additionally, the bill would still severely limit the courts’ ability to stop the destruction of historic places. While the amendment includes tweaks on when Section 106 review would apply, it continues to exclude nearly all federally funded projects from review and limit what impacts count as harm.

Section 106 works because it brings communities to the table before decisions are final. These changes would not make permitting faster. They would shut out the people who know these places best, and they would lead to more conflict and delay.

Preservation Action supports making federal permitting more efficient and predictable, and we stand ready to work with Congress on real reforms. But this bill was written behind closed doors without input from the historic preservation community and completely upends a 60-year-old law that communities across the country depend on.

We continue to urge Congress to OPPOSE on this deeply flawed bill without the complete removal of the historic preservation title. In light of the growing vocal opposition to this bill, we ask the Senate to reconsider their approach.

*Update*

Preservation Action remains strongly opposed to the harmful preservation provisions in the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act (S. 5653), as revised by the manager’s amendment released over the weekend. This bill is severely flawed and would have a devastating impact on core historic preservation protections afforded by the National Historic Preservation Act. See our full statement.

Your voice is critical, keep up your advocacy!

---

Just before recessing for month of October, a bipartisan group of Senators unveiled the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026 (S. 5653). This bill proposes major changes to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, and the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) with the goal of accelerating the permitting process for infrastructure projects. Title III of the Energy and Natural Resources portion deals with historic preservation. This bill constitutes the most significant changes to the National Historic Preservation Act and the Section 106 process in the law’s history. It would substantially weaken protections for historic places under Section 106 , curtailing consultation with State and Tribal Historic Preservation Offices, limiting what constitutes an undertaking, imposing rigid deadlines, and narrowing adverse effects. Preservation Action strongly opposes the provisions that weaken Section 106.

The bill’s text is available here.

The bill was introduced by Sen. Shelly Moore Capito (R-WV), Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), and Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM), the chairs and ranking members of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Following the bill’s introduction the Senate adjourned for the month of October. While the House and Senate out until after the midterm elections, the Senate is expected to move very quickly on this bill when they return on Nov. 9th. This bill was largely negotiated behind closed doors and Senators are looking to fast track the bill without a usual committee hearings process. Your voice will be critical over the next 5 weeks!

Here are some of the harmful changes that undermine the Section 106 process:

• The bill compresses and weakens the consultation process with State and Tribal Historic Preservation Offices, Tribal Nations, and local governments. The bill inserts rigid deadlines regardless of the projects complexity, would make consultation optional when determining an area of potential effect, and worse it effectively gives federal agencies the final word during disputes by deciding that other considerations outweigh historic preservation.
• The bill narrows what constitutes a federal undertaking, limiting which projects would even require review. The changes would exclude projects where the only federal involvement is federal financial assistance, like grants or loans. It would also exclude projects where the agency doesn’t exercise “substantial control” — a new, undefined threshold that could let agencies avoid review.
• The bill narrowly redefines what is considered an “adverse effect” on a historic property. The bill explicitly excludes many visual, atmospheric, and audible effects unless they “significantly” diminish the historic property, an undefined threshold. The bill would limit adverse effects to those that are “reasonably foreseeable”, defined as a “a reasonably close causal relationship” to the undertaking. This gives much more latitude to federal agencies to determine what is an adverse effect.
• The bill dramatically limits judicial review. The ability of project opponents would be severely limited, the bill would restrict who can file claims, and imposes a 150 day deadline to bring certain claims.
• The bill imposes harsh leverage over State and Tribal Historic Preservation Offices. The bill would increase evaluations by Interior of SHPOs to every two years, threatens to revoke federal funding if deadlines aren’t meant, and even includes the ability of the Interior Department to assume the role of the THPO.
• Exempts certain categories of transmission, pipeline, and nationwide permitting activities from Section 106 review.

The bill also includes some provisions that the historic preservation community has supported to improve the process like designating lead agencies and increased investments in the Historic Preservation Fund. The bill would reauthorize the HPF at $200 million annually through 2036 and provide $20 million for THPOs to develop a database for Tribal records. While positive, the bill only authorizes the HPF at $200 million, but does not appropriate any additional funding.

Preservation Action continues to analyze the bill, including provisions in other sections that could impact historic preservation. We are also working to compare the changes included in the permitting bill to those proposed by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation in July. Importantly, while changes proposed by the ACHP to Section 106 regulations could be litigated in court or undone by future administrations, changes made to statute like those in the permitting bill would be far more difficult to change.

Preservation Action is urging Congress to reject the provisions in the Senate permitting bill that weaken protections for historic resources. We stand ready to work with members of Congress on positive changes that strengthen Section 106 and actually improve efficiency.

The Senate is expected to hold a vote to proceed on Nov. 9th. Time is of the essence. We need your voice to fight back against threats to critical historic preservation protections.

---

Take Action!

Reach out to your members of Congress, especially Senators. Let them know the devastating impact the bill will have on historic resources in your community and urge them to OPPOSE the permitting reform bill!

Call your members of Congress!

Call the U.S Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121 and ask to be connected to your Representative or Senator’s office. Identify yourself as a constituent and urge them to oppose the permitting reform bill introduced in the Senate as currently drafted.

Here’s a short phone script to assist in your outreach.

Phone script

Hello, my name is [NAME], and I’m a constituent from [CITY/TOWN]. I’m calling to ask [Senator/Representative NAME] to oppose the Senate permitting reform bill, the American Affordability and Jobs Act (S. 5653), as currently drafted.

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act strikes a balance, keeping infrastructure projects moving while protecting the places our communities care about. This bill would substantially weaken those historic preservation protections. It would cut state, Tribal and local voices out of the process, allowing federal agencies to make unilateral decisions from Washington with little to no consultation.

This bill won’t make permitting faster. It will mean more conflict and more delay, while leaving historic places that drive tourism and local economies unprotected. The bill was written behind closed doors and is being rushed to a vote without a committee hearing.

There are ways to make the Section 106 process more efficient, but cutting the public out of the process and putting our communities’ historic resources at risk are not how we achieve it. Therefore I urge you to reject the Senate permitting reform bill. Thank you.

Here’s a short script to request a meeting with your members of Congress on behalf of an organization:

Meeting request script

“Hello, my name is [NAME], and I’m a constituent from [CITY/TOWN]. I’m calling regarding the Senate permitting reform bill, the American Affordability and Jobs Act (S. 5653).

The bill would have a devastating impact on historic preservation protections. It would cut State, Tribal, and local voices out of Section 106 historic preservation reviews and let federal agencies make unilateral decisions with little to no consultation. That means more conflict and more delay, not faster permitting.

I’d like to request a meeting with [Senator/Representative NAME], or with the staff member who handles energy, permitting, or natural resources issues, to discuss these concerns. Who’s the best person to speak with, and what’s the best way to schedule it? Thank you.

---

Email your members of Congress!

If you have a contact in your Representative or Senator’s office, reach out to them directly. If you need assistance reaching congressional staff, contact Preservation Action at rnaylor@preservationaction.org.

You can also check out our latest action alert to easily edit and send a letter to your members of Congress today!

---

Additional Resources:

• Coalition Preservation Partners: Preservation Coalition Letter Opposing Senate Permitting Reform Bill
• NCSHPO: Senate Proposal Does More Than “Streamline” Section 106
• NCSHPO: Permitting Reform Must Work for States One-Pager
• National Trust for Historic Preservation: Principal Objections to the Historic Preservation Title of the BAAJA, S.5653 One Pager
• National Trust for Historic Preservation: National Trust for Historic Preservation Rejects Key Provisions of Bipartisan Permitting Reform Bill
• ACRA: Senate Permitting Reform Bill- Additional Details
• Cultural Heritage Partners: War Room for Threats to Section 106
• Section 106 Strong
• Section 106 Strong: Permitting Reform Should Not Silence Americans One-Pager

UPDATE: Oct. 29. 2025

The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee held a committee hearing to “examine the Section 106 consultation process under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA).” Preservation Action along with several of our national partners attended and worked to educate members of the Committee ahead of the hearing on the importance of the NHPA and effectiveness and efficiency of the Section 106 process.

Thank you to everyone that took action! It is clear your advocacy had an impact. We will continue to educate members of Congress on the importance of NHPA and push back on any attempts to weaken this critical law. Preservation Action submitted written testimony for the record. You can review our testimony here. Stay tuned for more!

You can watch the full hearing and read testimony from the witnesses here.

---

The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee announced this week they would hold a full committee hearing to “examine the Section 106 consultation process under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA).” We are still awaiting more details, but the hearing is scheduled for Wednesday, Oct. 29th at 9:30am and will be broadcast on the committee’s website. Preservation Action will be there and is working closely with our partners to educate Senate offices.

We need your voice! Senators, especially Senators that serve on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, need to hear from you about the importance of the National Historic Preservation Act and the success of the Section 106 process. See suggested talking points below. 

Overview

The NHPA, enacted in 1966, created the national framework that allows us to identify, protect, and celebrate the historic places that tell America’s story. The Act established State and Tribal Historic Preservation Offices (SHPOs & THPOs) and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) — building a partnership that connects local voices to federal decision-making. Section 106 review ensures that federal projects consider their impacts on historic and cultural resources before decisions are made — keeping communities, Tribal Nations, and preservationists at the table.

In recent years, some federal lawmakers have sought to create more “efficiencies” in the federal permitting process, including changes to the National Environmental Policy Act, legislative efforts that exempt certain federal undertakings from the NHPA, and more recently the declaration of an Energy Emergency, which allows for sped up Section 106 review times for energy related projects.

While we appreciate the opportunity to discuss ways the process could be improved and no process is perfect, Section 106 continues to be a highly effective collaborative process with a proven track record of efficiency and success.

Talking Points

• Balancing preservation with progress:
  Section 106 does not stop or block projects — it ensures that federal agencies consider historic properties early in project planning and seek ways to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects.
• Efficient and predictable:
  Despite reviewing thousands of federal undertakings annually, the vast majority are completed quickly and efficiently by SHPOs and THPOs without delay. In Washington state for example, out of more than 5,000 Section 106 reviews performed by the SHPO in FY25, only 8% found adverse effects and the average review response time for undertakings was 3.7 days.
• Built-in flexibility:
  Section 106 regulations have built-in flexibility that can improve effectiveness and efficiency. Program alternatives, like Programmatic Agreements, allow agencies to expedite review for routine or recurring project types — saving time while ensuring preservation values are upheld.
• Encourages early planning and smarter project design:
  When agencies integrate Section 106 early, they can avoid costly redesigns or litigation by addressing historic preservation concerns upfront.
• Proven record of success:
  Section 106 has facilitated countless successful federal projects — highways, energy infrastructure, housing, and more — while protecting historic places of national and community importance. Check out some Section 106 success stories.
• Continued Investment in the preservation of our nation’s history:
  Especially as we prepare to commemorate the 250th anniversary of our nation, the 60th anniversary of the NHPA, and the 50th anniversary of the Historic Preservation Fund in 2026, we should be investing in preserving our nation’s history. Increased funding for SHPOs and THPOs would enhance staffing, technology, and consultation capacity, helping them process reviews more efficiently, and keep pace with growing federal project demands.

Take Action

Contact your Senators, especially if your Senator serves on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee (listed below), and let them know why the National Historic Preservation Act is important and how the Section 106 process has worked effectively and efficiently in your state. Use the talking points above and provide local examples of Section 106 successes.

If you have a personal contact in your Senator’s office, contact them directly. If that contact does not handle Public Lands or Natural Resources issues, ask them to share your message with the appropriate staff person in their office.

You can contact your Senator’s office by calling the Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121 and ask to be connected to your Senator’s office. If you need any help finding staff contacts, feel free to reach out to Rob Naylor at Preservation Action (rnaylor@preservationaction.org). 

Senators on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee:

Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT)

Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM)

Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY)

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR)

Sen. James Risch (R-ID)

Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA)

Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT)

Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-HI)

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR)

Sen. Angus King (I-ME)

Sen. David McCormick (R-PA)

Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV)

Sen. Jim Justice (R-WV)

Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-CO)

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA)

Sen. Alex Padilla (D-CA)

Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS)

Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ)

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK)

Sen. John Hoeven (R-ND)

Additional Resources

National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers: Federal Permitting Process Under a Microscope

American Cultural Resources Association: Take Action Now: Senate Hearing on Section 106

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation: Section 106 Review Process Handout

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation: Section 106 Success Stories

Stay tuned for more….