The U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday evening approved by a voice vote the Route 66 National Historic Trail Act.
The bill advances to the U.S. Senate for consideration.
According to reports by the U.S. House clerk, lawmakers quickly suspended rules for debate and proceeded to vote on the bill, called HR 801, without objection.
Introduced by U.S. Rep. Darin LaHood (R-Ill.) in February 2017, the legislation eventually attracted 21 co-sponsors from nine states — including lawmakers from all the eight states Route 66 traverses. The bill advanced through a House subcommittee in January.
LaHood’s remarks about the bill Tuesday on the House floor may be seen in this 4-minute video:
This is a summary of the bill:
H.R. 801 amends the National Trails System Act to designate a trail of approximately 2,400 miles extending from Chicago, Illinois, to Santa Monica, California, as the Route 66 National Historic Trail. The trail will be administered by the National Park Service in a manner that respects and maintains its idiosyncratic nature.
You can read my case, written in 2012, for having a Route 66 National Historic Trail. In recent years, Route 66: The Road Ahead group has made the national trail idea a top priority.
The bill’s chances of passage in the Senate remain uncertain, but Skopos Labs pegged the odds of HR 801 becoming law at 38 percent. That number, however, wasn’t updated Tuesday night after the House passed it.
UPDATE 6/6/2018: Pam Bowman, director of public lands policy for the National Trust for Historic Preservation, made this statement Wednesday about the bill’s passage
“No highway symbolizes Americana, freedom and the open road like Route 66. Congress took an important step toward bringing a vital national designation to the historic buildings, panoramic scenery, and urban and rural communities along the ‘Main Street of America.’ We look forward to working with our partners to ensure enactment of the legislation and the designation of Route 66 as a National Historic Trail this year.”
UPDATE 6/7/2018: The Joplin Globe published a follow-up story about the legislation. One nugget:
Bill Thomas, who serves as chairman of the board of directors of the Route 66 Road Ahead Partnership, said that he remains hopeful that the bill could pass as early as this year.
“We are very excited because this puts us one step closer to ensuring our efforts to preserve, promote and develop Route 66,” Thomas said. “We know a lot needs to be done before we can gain National Historic Trail designation, but this is a very good first start. I’m confident that by or before the end of the year, we’ll make sure that Route 66 is our newest National Historic Trail.”
(Screen-capture image from video of Rep. Darin LaHood speaking about the Route 66 National Historic Trail Act at the U.S. House of Representatives)
oh my dear God, could it actually become a reality?!?! Please don’t screw this up Senate!
Thank you for being such a passionate supporter of Route 66! Hopefully our legislators will do the right thing and get this done.
Wait a minute, “stretches into the northern part of our state, near Chicago?”
I would expect that the bill supporter would know that the road begins/ends in Chicago, not near it.
Very, very mixed feeling about this. I sure hope it’s for the best, if passed.
As some of you probably know, it was my desire to see a new, official “66” U.S. Route designation along a combination of historic alignments that would provide a unified marking plan from Chicago to Santa Monica.
However, I fully support the NHT legislation and hope it passes. However, I have some concerns about it. Number one, why is Williams (or any other community, really) opposing this? I sent an e-mail to the Williams chamber of commerce and was told that they were not aware of any opposition but would find out and get back to me. Hmmmmn.
Second, this legislation might still be a long way from actually getting passed into law so I would like to encourage people to write to their congressmen ESPECIALLY if you live in a
Route 66 state.
Third, how much will this improve signage and guidance? I have not really been able to get a
straight answer on that point either. One official heavily involved with this project said something like “I’m assuming so”. Hmmmm, again.
Last but not least, if the National Park Service is going to be responsible for the Route 66 jurisdiction, I am a little bit cautious about turning the Route over to the habitually underfunded Park Service. They already have campgrounds, picnic areas and hiking trails indefinitely closed in a number of parks due to lack of funding for maintenance. So will they be able to provide adequate markings including the so-called “green guide” exit signs on Route 66?
So, with those concerns taken into consideration, is a National Historic Trail really worth doing? Of course! But there might still be “a long row to hoe” ahead.
Regards,
Fred M. Cain