S-3735-119
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Sponsored by Jeff Merkley (D-OR)
What it does
This bill would amend the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act to prohibit the image of any living current or former elected official or other living political figure from appearing on the America the Beautiful — the National Parks and Federal Recreational Lands Pass. It would apply to all future designs of the pass, which provides access to more than 2,000 federal recreation sites. The bill does not change the pass's price, eligibility, or any other feature.
Who benefits
Current and future America the Beautiful pass holders who prefer that a broadly used federal recreation product remain free of political imagery. Federal land management agencies (National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, etc.) that may benefit from a clearer, nonpartisan design standard. Future administrations that would be insulated from pressure to feature political figures on the pass. Members of the public who visit federal recreation sites and object to political imagery on government-issued products.
Who is hurt
Any sitting or former president, elected official, or political figure whose image has been placed — or whose administration might wish to place an image — on the pass. The current administration, if it has already issued or planned a version of the pass featuring a political figure's image. Pass designers and contractors who would face a new statutory constraint on design choices. Potentially, any future administration that views the pass as a legitimate venue for public-facing government branding.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the America the Beautiful pass is a nonpartisan, widely used federal product purchased by millions of Americans across the political spectrum, and that placing a living political figure's image on it inappropriately uses a public lands program for political promotion. They contend that federal recreation passes have historically featured landscapes and wildlife — not politicians — and that this bill simply codifies that tradition into law to prevent future misuse regardless of which party holds power.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that the bill is a narrowly targeted response to a specific administration's design choice and that Congress already has oversight tools — including appropriations and agency directives — to address pass design without new statutory restrictions. They contend that the executive branch has broad discretion over the design of government-issued materials, and that legislating the specific content of a recreation pass sets a precedent for Congress to micromanage routine administrative decisions that have traditionally been left to agency discretion.