PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Kean, Thomas H. [R-NJ-7] · R–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 18, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.10340 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.10340 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.10340 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.10340 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2026-09-10 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposed 9/11 Legacy Preservation Act of 2026 would create a Library of Congress program to preserve survivors’ accounts of September 11, 2001. It would collect recorded interviews and relevant written materials, giving future readers and researchers access to survivors’ experiences. Public access to recordings would depend on feasibility and available resources, and collection would begin with an effort to record the oldest survivors first.
This Act may be cited as the 9/11 Legacy Preservation Act of 2026.
The Director of the American Folklife Center at the Library of Congress shall establish an oral history program
to collect video and audio recordings of personal histories and testimonials from survivors of September 11, 2001
which will be available for public use through the National Digital Library of the Library of Congress and such other methods as the Director considers appropriate to the extent feasible subject to available resources
to solicit, reproduce, and collect written materials (such as letters and diaries) relevant to the personal histories of survivors of September 11, 2001
shall attempt to collect the first such recordings from the oldest survivors.
The bill’s findings describe preserving survivors’ accounts as a national interest, intended to give future generations original sources about September 11. This is Congress’s stated rationale for the proposal, rather than evidence that the program has achieved those aims.
Congress finds the following:
It is in the Nation’s best interest to collect and catalog oral histories of 9/11 survivors so that future generations will have original sources of information regarding the lives and times of those who survived this tragic day, and so that Americans will never forget the events of September 11th, 2001.
The American Folklife Center’s Director would be required to establish the program and collect video and audio accounts from September 11 survivors.
The Director of the American Folklife Center at the Library of Congress shall establish an oral history program— (1) to collect video and audio recordings of personal histories and testimonials from survivors of September 11, 2001
The Director would create a recording collection with a catalog and index. Public access would be through the Library of Congress’s National Digital Library and other methods the Director considers appropriate, to the extent feasible and subject to available resources.
to create a collection of the recordings obtained (including a catalog and index) which will be available for public use through the National Digital Library of the Library of Congress and such other methods as the Director considers appropriate to the extent feasible subject to available resources
The program would also seek, copy, collect, and catalog relevant written materials, including letters and diaries. The Director would decide how to catalog them in coordination with the recording collection.
to solicit, reproduce, and collect written materials (such as letters and diaries) relevant to the personal histories of survivors of September 11, 2001, and to catalog such materials in a manner the Director considers appropriate, consistent with and complimentary to the efforts described in paragraphs (1) and (2).
The Director could partner with government and private entities to collect recordings and written materials. The Director could also consult interested people within available resources and develop guidelines for obtaining and making recordings available.
The Director may carry out the activities described in paragraphs (1) and (3) of subsection (a) through agreements and partnerships entered into with other government and private entities, and may otherwise consult with interested persons (within the limits of available resources) and develop appropriate guidelines and arrangements for soliciting, acquiring, and making available recordings under the program under this Act.
Recording collection would have to begin as soon as practicable after enactment. The Director would have to try to collect the first recordings from the oldest survivors; the text does not guarantee that they would be recorded first.
As soon as practicable after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director shall begin collecting video and audio recordings under subsection (a)(1), and shall attempt to collect the first such recordings from the oldest survivors.
The Librarian of Congress could seek and accept money and noncash contributions to support the program.
The Librarian of Congress may solicit and accept donations of funds and in-kind contributions to carry out the oral history program under section 3.
The bill would establish a separate Treasury gift account within the Library of Congress’s accounts. All money donated for the program would have to go into that account and be used only for the program. Donations not exclusively intended for the program could not be deposited there, and these restrictions would apply despite other provisions of law.
There is established in the Treasury (among the accounts of the Library of Congress) a gift account for the oral history program under section 3.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law— (1) any funds donated to the Librarian of Congress to carry out the oral history program under section 3 shall be deposited entirely into the gift account established under subsection (b); (2) the funds contained in such account shall be used solely to carry out the oral history program under section 3; and (3) the Librarian of Congress may not deposit into such account any funds donated to the Librarian which are not donated for the exclusive purpose of carrying out the oral history program under section 3.
The bill would authorize Congress to provide $250,000 for fiscal year 2026 and whatever amounts are necessary for each later fiscal year. This is permission for future appropriations—legislation providing money—not an appropriation of those amounts itself.
There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this Act— (1) $250,000 for fiscal year 2026; and (2) such sums as may be necessary for each succeeding fiscal year.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated September 18, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on House Administration on September 10, 2026.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-18T16:30:22Z. 2026-09-10: Referred to the House Committee on House Administration. 2026-09-10: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-09-10. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy change attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for a particular outside recipient or place was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. Program funding authorization alone is not an earmark; this conclusion does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow exemption, carve-out, or preferential benefit was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. The program’s intended participants and collection priorities do not alone establish such a benefit. This conclusion is limited to this version.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 18, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI