Technical corrections only. The changes between v3 and v4 reflect the bill's procedural movement from the House to the Senate and an updated attestation, with no alterations to the substantive legislative text. No policy changes were made.
Adams Memorial-Great American Heroes Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Moolenaar, John R. [R-MI-2]
- Committees
- Energy and Natural Resources Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Sep 30, 2026
Bottom line
The bill extends the Adams Memorial Commission's operational timeline and provides critical flexibility for selecting the memorial's site, aiming to ensure the project's successful completion.
What it actually does
This bill reauthorizes the Adams Memorial Commission, extending its authority until 2032, and clarifies the permissible locations for the Adams Memorial. It allows the memorial to be located within a newly defined 'Eligible Additional Area' or, if that proves unfeasible, within 'the Reserve' in Washington D.C., while waiving certain statutory restrictions on commemorative works in these areas.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that this bill is essential to allow the Adams Memorial Commission sufficient time to complete its mission of establishing a national memorial to John Adams and his family. They contend that the extended deadline and flexible site selection provisions are practical necessities for a complex project involving design, fundraising, and federal land use, ensuring that a significant historical figure is appropriately honored.
Opponents contend
No specific organized opposition is typically raised against the reauthorization of memorial commissions or the clarification of memorial sites, particularly for figures like John Adams. Potential critics might raise general concerns about the proliferation of memorials in the National Capital area or the long-term costs associated with federal commissions, but these are not direct arguments against this specific bill's provisions.
The bill is very short and clear, making it highly accessible for any reader to understand its provisions and implications within a few minutes.
Section 2(a)
Extension of Adams Memorial Commission Authority
This provision amends the John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act to extend the operational authority of the Adams Memorial Commission. Originally set to expire in 2025, the Commission's mandate is now extended until 2032. This seven-year extension ensures the Commission has adequate time to fulfill its responsibilities, including design, fundraising, and site development for the Adams Memorial.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue that extending the Commission's authority is a necessary administrative step to ensure the successful completion of the Adams Memorial. They contend that large-scale national memorial projects require significant time for planning, design, fundraising, and approvals, and this extension prevents the project from lapsing prematurely.
Critics contend
No specific opposition is typically raised against the extension of a commission for an authorized memorial, as it is largely a procedural matter. General concerns might be raised about the duration of commissions or the use of federal resources, but not directly against this specific extension.
Tradeoffs
The primary tradeoff is balancing the need for sufficient time to complete a complex project with the desire to avoid indefinite or excessively long-term commissions. This extension provides a defined additional period for the Commission to operate.
Section 2(c)
Clarification and Flexibility for Memorial Site Location
This section amends existing law (Public Law 107-315) to specify and provide flexibility for the Adams Memorial's location. It first directs the memorial to be located within an 'Adams Memorial: Eligible Additional Area' as depicted on a specific map. Crucially, it also includes a fallback provision: if this primary site is deemed unsuitable due to physical or security constraints, the memorial can then be located within 'the Reserve' (a designated area in Washington D.C. for commemorative works). Both options explicitly waive restrictions found in 40 U.S.C. 8908(c), which generally prohibits new commemorative works in the Reserve.
The bill explicitly waives the application of section 8908(c) of title 40, United States Code, for the establishment and location of the Adams Memorial. This section of the U.S. Code generally prohibits the establishment of new commemorative works within 'the Reserve,' a core area of the National Capital.
Section 2(b)(1) and Section 2(c) (new Section 1(a) of Public Law 107-315)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for overriding existing law for a specific purpose. While technical, it is a critical component for the bill's intent regarding site flexibility and is not necessarily evasive, but rather a direct legal mechanism.
Case for: Supporters argue that this waiver is essential to provide the Adams Memorial Commission with the necessary flexibility to find a suitable and feasible site. Without it, the memorial might be severely restricted in its placement, potentially delaying or even preventing its establishment in a prominent and appropriate location within the National Capital area.
Case against: Critics might contend that such waivers erode the integrity of the Commemorative Works Act, which was designed to protect the aesthetic and historical character of the National Capital's core areas. They could argue that each waiver sets a precedent, potentially leading to a piecemeal erosion of planning controls and an over-proliferation of memorials in sensitive areas.
Estimated impact: This waiver significantly broadens the potential pool of sites for the Adams Memorial within the designated areas, including the Reserve, which would otherwise be off-limits. This impacts urban planning, aesthetic considerations, and the long-term character of Washington D.C.'s monumental core.