Mike Kennedy (R-UT)
Historic Roadways Protection Act
A Republican bill with 3 Republican cosponsors · See all 3 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The Historic Roadways Protection Act aims to prohibit the Secretary of the Interior from using federal funds for specific tasks in Utah. This prohibition applies to finalizing or implementing new travel management plans within several covered travel management areas. Additionally, the bill restricts the implementation of four specific existing plans: the Indian Creek (Canyon Rims), San Rafael Desert, San Rafael Swell, and Labyrinth/Gemini Bridges travel management plans. These restrictions remain in place during the "applicable period," which lasts until the Secretary of the Interior certifies that all listed R.S. 2477 legal cases have been adjudicated.
Yes
- Scored +3
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
The bill addresses R.S. 2477 legal cases which often involve state or local claims to land rights against the federal government.
- Scored +2
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?
The bill protects land management processes during pending legal adjudication relevant to local Utah counties.
- Scored +1
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
The bill halts the implementation of new travel management plans until specific legal disputes regarding land rights are resolved.
The opposite· 3 of 4
- Scored -2
Does this reduce what the federal government spends?
The bill restricts the use of federal funds for finalizing and implementing specific travel management plans in Utah.
- Scored -2
Does this invest in rural communities?
The bill prevents the implementation of travel management plans which could impact land access and activity in rural Utah areas.
- Scored -1
Would business owners be better off under this?
The restriction on travel management plans may create uncertainty for businesses relying on specific land-use access.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Protection of land management processes during legal disputes: By prohibiting the finalization or implementation of new plans, the bill stops the use of funds for these activities until specific R.S. 2477 cases are adjudicated (Section 2(a)(1), Section 2(b)(1)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Restriction of existing travel management plans: The bill prevents the implementation of specific plans, including the Indian Creek (Canyon Rims), San Rafael Desert, San Rafael Swell, and Labyrinth/Gemini Bridges travel management plans (Section 2(b)(2)).
-
Limitation on administrative actions in Utah: The Secretary of the Interior is prohibited from obligating or expending federal funds to finalize or implement new travel management plans for several specific covered areas in the State of Utah (Section 2(b)(1)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The bill addresses R.S. 2477 legal cases which often involve state or local claims to land rights against the federal government.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — The bill restricts the use of federal funds for finalizing and implementing specific travel management plans in Utah.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — The bill protects land management processes during pending legal adjudication relevant to local Utah counties. Would business owners be better off under this? — The restriction on travel management plans may create uncertainty for businesses relying on specific land-use access.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — The bill halts the implementation of new travel management plans until specific legal disputes regarding land rights are resolved. Does this invest in rural communities? — The bill prevents the implementation of travel management plans which could impact land access and activity in rural Utah areas.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this make housing cost less? — By freezing land management plans, the bill may indirectly limit the administrative processing of land use relevant to local community needs.
- 1/14/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Blake MooreRepublican · Utah
Celeste MaloyRepublican · Utah
Burgess OwensRepublican · Utah