Tuskegee Airmen Memorial Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Rep. Figures, Shomari [D-AL-2]
- Committees
- Budget Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jul 22, 2026
Bottom line
This bill grants a private organization permission to build a memorial for the Tuskegee Airmen in the D.C. area, with all costs to be covered by private funds.
What it actually does
This bill authorizes Tuskegee Airmen, Inc. to establish a commemorative work on Federal land in the District of Columbia and its environs to honor the commitment and service of the original Tuskegee Airmen. It explicitly prohibits the use of Federal funds for the establishment of the work, making Tuskegee Airmen, Inc. solely responsible for funding. The bill also outlines procedures for the deposit of any excess funds remaining after the memorial's establishment or if the authority to establish it expires.
Section 2(a)
Authorization for Tuskegee Airmen Memorial
This section grants Tuskegee Airmen, Inc. the authority to create a memorial on federal land within the District of Columbia or its surrounding areas. The purpose of this memorial is to honor the dedication and service of the original Tuskegee Airmen who served in the United States Army Air Forces during World War II.
Section 2(c)
No Federal Funding for Memorial Establishment
This provision explicitly states that no federal money can be used to cover any costs associated with establishing the commemorative work. Tuskegee Airmen, Inc. is made solely responsible for raising funds through contributions and paying all expenses related to the memorial's creation.
Requires the establishment of the commemorative work to comply with chapter 89 of title 40, United States Code (the Commemorative Works Act).
Section 2(b)
Why it matters:Standard legislative practice for ensuring new projects adhere to established legal frameworks for similar undertakings. It avoids re-stating lengthy procedural requirements.
Case for: Ensures that the memorial is established according to established procedures for design, location, and approval of commemorative works on federal land, maintaining consistency and preventing ad-hoc development.
Case against: No direct 'case against' this specific requirement, as it's a procedural safeguard. However, some might argue that the Commemorative Works Act itself can be cumbersome.
Estimated impact: Ensures the memorial undergoes a rigorous review process by relevant federal agencies (e.g., National Park Service, National Capital Planning Commission, Commission of Fine Arts) regarding site selection, design, and environmental impact, potentially adding time and complexity to the project.
Outlines procedures for handling any funds remaining after the establishment of the memorial, or if the authority to establish it expires. Excess funds are to be transmitted to the Secretary of the Interior for deposit into a specific account for maintenance and preservation, or to the National Park Foundation for memorials.
Section 2(d)
Why it matters:Standard legislative practice to ensure proper financial stewardship and accountability for privately funded public projects, particularly regarding long-term maintenance and the disposition of unspent funds.
Case for: Ensures that any surplus funds are used for appropriate purposes, such as the long-term maintenance of the memorial or other national memorials, preventing misuse or indefinite retention by the private entity.
Case against: No direct 'case against' this, as it's a fiscal responsibility measure. Some might argue it adds a layer of administrative complexity for the private organization.
Estimated impact: Provides a clear financial framework for the project's conclusion, ensuring sustainability for the memorial or responsible reallocation of funds.
States that the budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, shall be determined by reference to the latest statement titled 'Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation' submitted by the Chairman of the House Budget Committee.
Section 3
Why it matters:Standard legislative practice for bills that might have budgetary implications, ensuring compliance with PAYGO rules without detailing the actual budget impact within the bill text. It delegates the formal scoring to the appropriate committee.
Case for: Ensures the bill adheres to the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act, promoting fiscal responsibility by requiring that any increase in the deficit caused by the bill be offset.
Case against: No direct 'case against' this procedural clause. Some might argue against PAYGO rules in general, but not this specific reference.
Estimated impact: Formally links the bill to the PAYGO process, meaning its fiscal impact (even if zero, as in this case due to the federal funding prohibition) will be officially recorded.