House Republicans on the Natural Resources Committee have launched an inquiry into the Biden administration’s proposal to open public lands to private ownership. Led by Committee Chairman Bruce Westerman, lawmakers are closely examining a contentious rule change put forth by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), allowing the trading of Natural Asset Companies (NACs) on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE).
According to a report by Fox News on Thursday, January 11, 2024, NACs are specialized entities designed to “protect, restore, and grow the natural assets under their management to foster healthy ecosystems.” Developed in collaboration with the Intrinsic Exchange Group and the NYSE, these companies could potentially become publicly traded entities if the proposed rule is finalized.
In a letter addressed to SEC Chairman Gary Gensler and Haoxiang Zhu, the director of the SEC’s Division of Trading and Markets, House Republicans expressed deep concerns about the potential impact of NACs on the management of federal lands, conservation of wildlife habitat, and responsible development of natural resources.
The lawmakers particularly worry about the unprecedented power grab that could occur if private investment interests gain control and management of national parks and other publicly owned lands. They argue that such a scenario would undermine federal authority and jeopardize the statutory multiple-use mandates established under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976.
The Act mandates a “multiple-use” and sustained yield approach, requiring the Department of the Interior to permit various uses of the lands it manages, including energy development, grazing, recreation, and mining. The proposed NAC rule, however, could potentially shift the balance by allowing lands to be managed primarily for conservation purposes, aligning with environmentalists’ goals and the Bureau of Land Management’s initiatives.
While proponents argue that NACs aim to capture the intrinsic and productive value of nature, providing a store of value based on vital assets supporting the economy, House Republicans express concerns about a potential shift in decision-making. They fear that federal lands controlled by NACs might be subject to the influence of “eco-activists” rather than the established channels of Congress or government scientists. This, they argue, could lead to arbitrary designations and ill-defined terms, posing a threat to the multiple-use mandates of federal lands.
Moreover, Republicans caution against the possibility of offshoring energy production to countries with poor human rights and environmental records, warning that NACs could inadvertently facilitate foreign ownership of public property.
