Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the National Security topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances H 356 to restrict foreign-adversary land ownership near military training sites
Summary
H 356, aimed at preventing foreign adversaries from owning land near critical military training areas and enabling whistleblower-driven divestiture, advanced to the Senate floor after committee debate over retroactive language, lienholder protections and the process for designating a foreign adversary.
Representative Hill introduced H 356 as legislation to prevent foreign adversaries from owning land near critical military training areas in Idaho and to enable forced divestiture where necessary. He framed the bill as a response to foreign attempts "to access U.S. military sites" for espionage and said the bill included a whistleblower clause to report suspicious holdings and a foreclosure mechanism to effect divestiture.
Colonel Kyle Carpenter described the strategic training value of the Mountain Home Range Complex and the Orchard Combat Training Center, noting the complex is "the size of Vermont" and provides terrain critical for large-force training. Lieutenant Colonel Travis Slack (366th Fighter Wing) testified neutrally that the remoteness and terrain variety were valuable for training and that encroachment could undermine operational effectiveness.
Opposition focused on legal and property-rights consequences. Bob Rice of the Idaho Land and Title Association identified a technical problem with language that would deem conflicting deeds and contracts invalid "from the date of adoption," which he said would complicate divestiture and lien satisfaction. Senators asked how the bill would interact with federal designations of foreign adversaries and whether state enforcement could expose lawful landholders or lenders to loss; Representative Hill said declaration of a foreign adversary involves executive and multi-agency processes and noted the bill included provisions intended to protect legitimate owners under a long-term-pattern definition.
The committee voted to send H 356 to the floor with a do-pass recommendation. Senator Adams moved the motion; Senator Den Hartog seconded. The motion carried by voice vote; Vice Chairman Bernt and Chairman Guthrie requested to be recorded as voting nay.
What to watch next: Floor consideration is likely to include debate or amendment on retroactivity, the effect on lienholders, and agency roles in enforcement and disclosure. The bill cites national-security rationale and cross-jurisdictional implications.
Ending: With the committee's do-pass recommendation, H 356 moves to the full Senate; recorded nays are noted in the committee minutes.
