Senate Advances Bill Narrowing Historic Preservation Law
The 500-page Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026 passed a 73-25 Senate vote despite opposition from preservation groups.
Updated on Nov. 10, 2026 in Legislative Policy
Live Poll
Should the federal government loosen historic-preservation reviews to speed up infrastructure projects?
The US Senate advanced the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026 (S.5653) by a 73-25 vote on Monday, November 10. The bill, introduced by Senator Shelley Moore Capito, a West Virginia Republican, narrows the scope of the National Historic Preservation Act.
Why it matters
Senator Capito stated that permitting delays cost American manufacturers $12.1 billion every year and have held up infrastructure and energy investments. Museum and preservation organizations, which called the bill a sweeping assault on historic and sacred places, argue it weakens protections nationwide.
The bill passed a 73-25 Senate vote and is 500 pages long, with the text introduced just 48 hours before the scheduled vote. It makes consultation with tribal nations optional and removes the requirement that federal agencies notify and consult the public about potential harm to historic sites.
The players
Shelley Moore Capito
Senator from West Virginia and Republican sponsor of the bill, who has argued that permitting reviews delay critical infrastructure and energy investment.
106 Strong Coalition
A coalition of more than 1,200 organizations, tribal nations, and advocates that opposes the bill and has urged Congress to defeat it.
The details
The bill targets Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, which requires federal agencies to consider the impact of federally funded building projects, and narrows the definition of what constitutes a historic site. Its cosponsors are Senators Mike Lee, Sheldon Whitehouse, and Martin Heinrich, and the 106 Strong Coalition, which includes more than 1,200 organizations, tribal nations, and advocates, sent a letter to Congress on November 6 calling for its defeat.
Timeline
November 6: The 106 Strong Coalition sent a letter to Congress calling for the defeat of S.5653.
November 10: The Senate advanced S.5653 by a 73-25 vote.
December 18: The current Senate session is scheduled to end.
January 3: New senators are to be sworn in.
Political Context
Opponents argue the bill rolls back Section 106 consultation requirements that let tribal nations and the public weigh in on federally funded projects. Critics contend that making tribal consultation optional and dropping notice duties would weaken protections for historic and sacred sites.
If enacted, the bill would change how federally funded building projects are reviewed for effects on historic sites, and tribal consultation would become optional. Projects in West Virginia and elsewhere could move forward with fewer required public notices and consultations.
The takeaway
The bill's fate will determine whether permitting speed or historic and tribal consultation takes priority in federal construction review. Readers following federal infrastructure decisions should track the bill's final Senate and House action.
Further reading
For more background on how these votes move through Congress, see Legislative Policy coverage.
Live Poll
Should the federal government loosen historic-preservation reviews to speed up infrastructure projects?
