National Trust for Historic Preservation: Return to home page

The election is behind us, and Congress is about to get back to work. One of the first things on the Senate’s agenda could change what happens to the places you care about.

Think of the place that makes your town yours. A Main Street you’ve walked for years. A battlefield down the road. A site that has been sacred to a Tribal Nation for generations.

Right now, the people who live near places like these get a say before the federal government builds, funds, or approves a project that could harm them. A bill in the Senate, S. 5653, would take much of that away.

If federal money is building something in your town, you should have a chance to speak up. Under this bill, many highways, bridges, and other federally funded projects would skip historic review entirely. An overpass looming over a historic downtown, or constant noise beside a sacred site, would no longer count as harm.

Faster permitting can be a good thing, and we support it. We're not trying to stop anything getting built, we just don't want to bulldoze our history in the process. We’ve asked Congress to fix these provisions. Until it does, tell your Senators to oppose S. 5653 as written.

The Senate returns Monday, November 9. Make sure your Senators hear from you before then.

Tell your Senators: Don’t gut our history.

It takes one minute. Your message goes straight to both of your Senators.

The proposed federal permitting reform legislation (Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026) includes changes that could significantly weaken protections for historic and cultural resources. As currently drafted, the bill’s preservation provisions would limit meaningful consultation with Tribal Nations and preservation stakeholders, narrow the scope of Section 106 review, expand unilateral federal agency authority, and constrain judicial review.

On October 21, 2026, staff from the National Trust for Historic Preservation held an in-depth discussion of the bill's most concerning provisions and their potential impacts on communities and historic places nationwide. This webinar featured a technical analysis of key legislative language, insights into the current political landscape, and practical guidance on advocacy strategies.

Links & Resources:

• Understanding And Responding To Federal Permitting Reform Slides (PDF)
• Principal Objections to the Historic Preservation Title of the BAAJA, S.5653 (PDF)
• National Preservation Partners Coalition Letter
• Section 106: Myth vs. Facts
• Advocacy Action – Tell your Senators: Oppose the bill as written and demand meaningful changes to its historic preservation provisions
• Story: Federal Permitting Reform Process 101
• Section 106 Threat – Resources
• Wall Street Journal Statement from National Trust
• Story: The Past, Present, and Future of the National Historic Preservation Act
• Historic Preservation Defense Fund

Section 106 Regulations Revisions Links

• Live Stream the ACHP November Business Meeting (November 10)
• Draft Dear Colleague Letter (NCSHPO)

On October 21, 2026, a coalition of preservation organizations, including the National Trust for Historic Preservation, sent a letter to Sens. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Mike Lee (R-UT) and Martin Heinrich (D-NM) regarding the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act (S. 5653).

The National Trust works to protect historic and cultural resources through the National Historic Preservation Act, including Section 106, which ensures that federal agencies consider the effects of their actions on historic places and consult with Tribal Nations, states, local governments, and the public. We support making federal reviews more efficient and predictable, but not at the expense of these essential protections or the voices of the communities they serve.

We strongly support the letter’s concerns about the historic preservation provisions of S. 5653 as drafted. We believe Congress should revisit these provisions and work with the preservation community, Tribal Nations, states, and local governments to develop reforms that improve efficiency while maintaining meaningful consultation, accountability, and effective protections for historic and cultural resources.

The Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act (BAAJA) contains several provisions that would negate the core protections and purpose of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 by empowering federal agencies to make unilateral decisions without consulting state or local governments, Tribes, or the American public. The proposed legislation also contains multiple ambiguous provisions that would generate confusion and litigation, and lead to the loss of historic resources. This analysis focuses on provisions of greatest concern and is not an exhaustive review of all issues raised by the bill.

On October 15, 1966, President Lyndon Johnson signed the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). He said it was meant "to give part of our country back to its people."

Sixty years on, that is still what it does. The NHPA created the National Register. It created a preservation office in every state. And it created Section 106—the requirement that before a federally funded project damages a historic place, the people who live there get to be heard.

A permitting reform bill now moving through the Senate (S. 5653) would make much of that consultation optional. Agencies could end the conversation on their own. Fewer places would qualify for review. Fewer harms would count. And the courts would be a weaker backstop when agencies get it wrong.

For sixty years, preservation has worked because communities have a voice. Tell your Senators to keep it that way.

The National Trust opposes the bill’s Section 106 provisions and is demanding meaningful changes to its historic preservation provisions.

We support more efficient and predictable federal permitting, but we will not accept efficiency at the expense of silencing communities and the loss of our nation’s history.

Sixty years ago, Congress understood the value of giving ordinary Americans a seat at the table and passed the National Historic Preservation Act. Ask your Senators not lose sight of what your community’s history means to you.

Tell your Senators: Don’t discard our history by limiting the role of Section 106 and seek meaningful changes to the historic preservation provisions of the bill.