People’s White House Historic Preservation Act
- Bill Number
- H.R. 6761
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Public Lands and Natural Resources
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-12-16: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- Last Updated
- 2026-03-04T09:06:30Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
The "People's White House Historic Preservation Act" (H.R. 6761) aims to ensure that the White House is subject to key historic preservation requirements under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). The NHPA is a federal law that protects historic properties by requiring federal agencies to consider the effects of their actions on such sites before making changes. This bill removes an existing exemption that previously shielded the White House from these rules.
Key Provisions
- Amendment to Existing Law: The bill modifies Section 307104 of title 54, United States Code (which covers NHPA exemptions).
- It deletes the phrase "the White House or its grounds" from the list of properties exempt from certain NHPA requirements.
- It also makes a minor grammatical adjustment by replacing a comma and "or" with just "or" to maintain sentence structure.
- Short Title: The legislation is officially named the "People's White House Historic Preservation Act."
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Prior to this bill, Section 307104 exempted the White House and its grounds from specific NHPA obligations, such as consulting with preservation experts or assessing impacts on historic features before renovations or alterations.
- The amendment eliminates this exemption, bringing the White House under the same federal historic preservation standards applied to other national historic sites. This means any federal actions affecting the White House must now follow NHPA processes, like reviewing potential harm to its historical value.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: The National Park Service (NPS) and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP)—federal bodies responsible for enforcing the NHPA—will gain oversight authority over White House modifications. This could lead to more formal reviews and delays for projects like renovations, affecting the Executive Office of the President.
- On Citizens: Preservation advocates and the public may benefit from greater transparency and protection of the White House as a national symbol, potentially allowing public input in preservation decisions. However, it could indirectly limit presidential flexibility in using the property.
- On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, though enhanced preservation could reinforce the White House's status as a global cultural icon, supporting U.S. soft power in heritage diplomacy.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Federal Agencies: NPS and ACHP, which will handle new compliance responsibilities; the Executive Office of the President, facing additional regulatory hurdles.
- Preservation Community: Historic preservation groups and experts, who gain tools to protect the site.
- Congress and Public: Lawmakers (as shown by the bill's bipartisan sponsors) and citizens interested in cultural heritage, who may influence or be affected by future White House changes.
- White House Operators: Staff and future administrations, required to integrate preservation reviews into operations.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Strengthens NHPA enforcement by closing a loophole, promoting uniform application of historic preservation laws across federal properties. No direct challenges to constitutionality, as it aligns with Congress's authority over federal lands and buildings under Article I.
- Constitutional: Could subtly check executive discretion over federal real estate, balancing presidential needs with congressional oversight of national heritage, without infringing on core executive functions.
- Political: Highlights bipartisan interest in safeguarding symbols of democracy, but may spark debates over executive autonomy versus public accountability, especially during politically charged administrations. The bill's referral to the House Committee on Natural Resources underscores its focus on federal property management.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (32)
Rep. Carson, André [D-IN-7], Rep. Carter, Troy A. [D-LA-2], Rep. Chu, Judy [D-CA-28], Rep. Clarke, Yvette D. [D-NY-9], Rep. Watson Coleman, Bonnie [D-NJ-12], Rep. Davis, Danny K. [D-IL-7], Rep. Dean, Madeleine [D-PA-4], Rep. Escobar, Veronica [D-TX-16], Rep. Foushee, Valerie P. [D-NC-4], Rep. Garcia, Robert [D-CA-42], Rep. Garcia, Sylvia R. [D-TX-29], Rep. Goldman, Daniel S. [D-NY-10], Rep. Hoyer, Steny H. [D-MD-5], Rep. Huffman, Jared [D-CA-2], Rep. Kamlager-Dove, Sydney [D-CA-37], Rep. Krishnamoorthi, Raja [D-IL-8], Rep. Min, Dave [D-CA-47], Rep. Moore, Gwen [D-WI-4], Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large], Rep. Pingree, Chellie [D-ME-1], Rep. Pocan, Mark [D-WI-2], Rep. Schakowsky, Janice D. [D-IL-9], Rep. Takano, Mark [D-CA-39], Rep. Titus, Dina [D-NV-1], Rep. Thompson, Bennie G. [D-MS-2], Rep. Velázquez, Nydia M. [D-NY-7], Rep. Costa, Jim [D-CA-21], Rep. Thanedar, Shri [D-MI-13], Rep. Thompson, Mike [D-CA-4], Rep. Cohen, Steve [D-TN-9], Rep. Lieu, Ted [D-CA-36], Rep. Garamendi, John [D-CA-8]
Recent Actions
- 2025-12-16: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- 2025-12-16: Introduced in House
- 2025-12-16: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- People’s White House Historic Preservation Act — issued 2025-12-16 — PDF (2 pages)