HR-1135-115
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 391.
Sponsored by James Clyburn (D-SC)
What it does
This bill would amend the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act of 1996 to extend the Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) Historic Preservation Fund Grant Program through fiscal years 2018 to 2024. The program provides federal grant funding to help HBCUs preserve and restore their historic buildings and structures. Without reauthorization, the program would lose its legal authority to receive and distribute funds.
Who benefits
The approximately 100 accredited HBCUs across the United States would be the primary beneficiaries, as they would gain continued access to federal grant funding for preservation of historic campus structures. Students, faculty, and staff at those institutions would benefit from maintained or restored facilities. Local communities surrounding HBCU campuses — many of which are in the South — would benefit from the preservation of historically and culturally significant buildings. Historians, preservationists, and researchers with an interest in African American educational history would also benefit.
Who is hurt
Federal taxpayers would bear the cost of the grant funding extended through FY2024. Other historic preservation programs or grant applicants competing for limited discretionary funding within the National Park Service budget could face indirect resource competition. No specific private-sector group faces direct regulatory burden from this bill.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that HBCU campuses contain some of the most historically significant African American cultural and architectural heritage in the United States, and that many of these institutions lack the private endowment resources needed to fund major preservation projects on their own. They contend that the federal government has a longstanding interest in historic preservation — reflected in the National Historic Preservation Act — and that extending this targeted program ensures that a unique and irreplaceable segment of American history is not lost to deterioration. Supporters also note that the program has an established track record, making reauthorization a low-risk continuation of proven policy rather than a new experiment.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that singling out one category of institution for a dedicated federal preservation grant program raises questions about equitable treatment of other historically significant colleges and universities that face similar preservation challenges without dedicated federal support. They contend that existing broad-based historic preservation programs — such as the Historic Preservation Fund administered by the National Park Service — are already available to HBCUs and that a separate, institution-specific program duplicates existing federal infrastructure. Opponents may also argue that extending the program through FY2024 adds to discretionary spending without a rigorous evaluation of the program's outcomes or cost-effectiveness relative to alternative uses of those funds.
Constitutional context
The bill rests on Congress's broad spending power under Article I, Section 8, which allows Congress to appropriate funds for programs it deems in the general welfare. The program is administered through the National Park Service, an executive branch agency, consistent with Congress's authority to establish and fund federal programs. No significant Commerce Clause, Nondelegation, or Takings issues are raised by a straightforward grant reauthorization. Post-Loper Bright (2024) and West Virginia v. EPA (2022) major-questions concerns are not implicated here, as the bill does not delegate broad new regulatory authority to an agency — it simply extends an existing, narrowly scoped grant program.
Checks and balances
Congress retains the power of the purse by setting the reauthorization window (FY2018–FY2024) and requiring future reauthorization for the program to continue beyond that period. The executive branch, through the National Park Service and the Department of the Interior, gains continued administrative authority to receive applications, evaluate grants, and distribute funds. No new judicial or regulatory authority is created. The structure keeps Congress in a position to review and modify the program at each reauthorization cycle.
Historical precedent
The original HBCU Historic Preservation Fund Grant Program was established under the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act of 1996. The broader Historic Preservation Fund, administered by the National Park Service under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, provides the wider statutory framework within which this program operates.