HR-9269-119
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Sponsored by James Clyburn (D-SC)
What it does
This bill would extend the authorization period of the African American Civil Rights Network from 7 years to 10 years after the date of the bill's enactment. The African American Civil Rights Network, administered by the National Park Service, connects historic sites, museums, and cultural landmarks related to the African American civil rights movement. The bill makes a single amendment to the existing statute in title 54 of the United States Code.
Who benefits
The National Park Service, which would continue administering the network without needing new authorizing legislation. Owners and operators of sites within the network — including museums, historic landmarks, and community organizations — who benefit from continued federal recognition and potential coordination resources. Educators, researchers, and students who use network sites for historical study. Tourists and the local economies surrounding network sites. Preservation advocates who support federal recognition of civil rights history.
Who is hurt
There are no clearly identifiable groups who would be directly harmed by this bill. Taxpayers could bear any administrative costs associated with the extended authorization, though the bill does not itself appropriate funds. Organizations or sites that compete for National Park Service attention or resources could face indirect opportunity costs if the network's continued operation draws on limited agency capacity.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the African American Civil Rights Network preserves and connects historically significant sites that document a foundational chapter in American history, and that a 3-year extension ensures continuity of federal recognition without interruption. They contend that allowing the authorization to lapse would disrupt coordination among network sites, potentially harming preservation efforts and the communities that depend on heritage tourism tied to these landmarks.
Opponents argue
Opponents could argue that reauthorization should be accompanied by a formal review of the network's effectiveness, cost, and whether its current membership reflects the most historically significant sites — rather than a straightforward extension that defers that accountability. They might also contend that the National Park Service's existing preservation authorities are sufficient and that a dedicated network adds administrative overhead without a demonstrated, measurable benefit over baseline NPS operations.