A small clarification and technical update. The short title of the Act was simplified, and a new paragraph was added to Section 3(a) to clarify the effect of the grants on budget suballocations. The core provisions regarding federal contributions toward the establishment of the Theodore Roosevelt Presidential Library remain unchanged.
Theodore Roosevelt Presidential Library Act
- Sponsor
- Sen. Hoeven, John [R-ND]
- Committees
- Energy and Natural Resources Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Sep 15, 2026
Bottom line
This bill provides federal financial and material support for the establishment of a presidential library dedicated to Theodore Roosevelt, requiring significant non-federal matching funds and ensuring the library's operational independence.
What it actually does
This bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to provide grants totaling up to $50,000,000 to the Theodore Roosevelt Presidential Library Foundation for the establishment of the Theodore Roosevelt Presidential Library in Medora, North Dakota. These grants are contingent upon the Foundation securing at least $100,000,000 from non-federal sources. Additionally, the bill permits federal agencies to loan historical artifacts related to Theodore Roosevelt to the Foundation without monetary consideration.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue this bill honors a significant historical figure, promotes education about his legacy, and supports cultural institutions through a public-private partnership model that leverages federal funds to incentivize substantial state and private investment. They contend that the federal contribution is a fitting recognition of a president whose impact was national and international, ensuring his story is preserved and accessible.
Opponents contend
Critics might argue that federal funds should not be used for presidential libraries, especially when significant private and state funding is already available, or that such projects are primarily local or state responsibilities. They may also question the precedent of federal funding for institutions that are largely privately operated, suggesting these funds could be better allocated to other national priorities.
The bill is very short and easy to read, allowing ample time for public scrutiny and understanding of its provisions.
Section 3(a)
Authorization of Federal Grants for Library Establishment
This provision authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to provide grants totaling up to $50,000,000 to the Theodore Roosevelt Presidential Library Foundation. These funds are specifically for establishing the Library, preserving materials related to President Roosevelt, and offering interpretive and educational services. The grants are contingent on the Foundation securing at least $100,000,000 from the State of North Dakota or other non-Federal sources before federal funds can be disbursed.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that this federal investment is a fitting tribute to a historically significant president, ensuring the preservation of his legacy and providing educational opportunities. The matching requirement ensures that federal funds are leveraged effectively, encouraging substantial non-federal commitment and demonstrating broad support for the project.
Critics contend
Opponents might contend that using federal taxpayer money for a presidential library, particularly one with a significant state and private funding base, is an inappropriate use of national resources that could be directed to other priorities. They may also question the precedent of federal funding for such institutions, which have historically relied more heavily on private philanthropy.
Tradeoffs
The bill balances federal recognition and support for a historical figure with the principle of local and private funding for such institutions, using a matching requirement to ensure shared responsibility and reduce the sole burden on federal taxpayers.
Section 3(b)
Loan of Federal Artifacts and Objects
This provision authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to enter into agreements with the Foundation to loan historical, educational, artistic, natural, and other museum artifacts and objects related to Theodore Roosevelt from federal agencies, including the National Park Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. These loans would be without monetary consideration, primarily for items not currently on public display, and subject to terms ensuring their preservation and exhibition.
Grant funds provided under this subsection may not be used for the maintenance or operation of the Library.
Section 3(a)(3)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to clearly define the scope of authorized funding and prevent ongoing federal financial responsibility for operational costs, ensuring that federal contributions are for capital establishment only.
Case for: Supporters argue this ensures federal funds are used solely for the capital costs of establishment, preventing an open-ended federal commitment to the library's long-term operational expenses and encouraging the Foundation to secure sustainable private funding for ongoing needs.
Case against: Critics might argue that excluding operational funds could make the library's long-term financial sustainability more challenging, potentially limiting its ability to maintain programs or staff effectively without continuous, robust fundraising efforts, especially in its early years.
Estimated impact: Limits the federal financial commitment to the initial establishment phase, potentially saving millions in future operational costs for the federal government.
The Secretary or any other Federal entity shall have no involvement in the operation of the Library, except at the request of the non-Federal entity responsible for the operation of the Library in accordance with applicable laws.
Section 3(c)
Why it matters:This is standard practice to delineate federal and non-federal responsibilities, ensuring the library remains primarily a non-federal entity in its day-to-day management and governance, consistent with the model for most presidential libraries.
Case for: Proponents argue this ensures the library's independence from federal bureaucracy and political influence in its programming and management, aligning with the model of privately operated presidential libraries and fostering local control over its mission and activities.
Case against: Opponents might argue that a complete hands-off approach, even with a request clause, could limit potential federal expertise or resources that might benefit the library's operations, especially in areas like archival management, historical interpretation, or security, where federal agencies possess specialized knowledge.
Estimated impact: Establishes clear operational autonomy for the Foundation, preventing federal entanglement in day-to-day management and ensuring the library's non-federal governance structure.