PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Kamlager-Dove, Sydney [D-CA-37] · D–CA
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 Natural Resources.
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: Feb 6, 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.1704 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.1704 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.1704 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.1704 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 · 2025-02-27 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 RESTORE Act would create a federal program to identify, preserve, and teach the history of communities founded by formerly enslaved African Americans. It would allow grants to associated property owners, governments, and community organizations, and require a study and a regularly updated registry of settlements. Grant consideration would require the property owner’s consent. The bill would authorize funding, but would not itself provide that money.
This Act may be cited as the Revitalizing and Empowering Freedom Settlements Through Opportunity, Resilience, and Education Act or the RESTORE Act.
The term Freedom Settlement means a community established by formerly enslaved African Americans following emancipation
The Secretary shall establish within the Service a program to be known as the National Freedom Settlements Preservation Program.
Each of the following entities are eligible for a grant under the Program: (A) A property owner of a property associated with Freedom Settlements. (B) Tribal, State, or local governments. (C) Community organizations that have demonstrated local leadership and a commitment to community development.
Freedom Settlements may only be considered for a grant under the Program— (1) with the consent of the owner of the applicable property;
The Secretary shall conduct a study to identify key sites
The Secretary shall maintain and regularly update a comprehensive registry of Freedom Settlements
There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section $3,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2026 through 2031.
Section 2 presents congressional findings about historical discrimination, missing documentation, and preservation needs. Its statements that recognition and investment would improve equity are the bill’s stated rationale, not demonstrated outcomes of the proposed program.
Congress finds the following:
It is difficult to fully quantify and understand the history and current status of all the Freedmen’s Settlements in the United States due to lack of research and investment in analyzing, preserving, and supporting these historic settlements, towns, and communities
Recognizing and providing resources for Freedman’s Settlements through Federal identification, designation of historic status, comprehensive documentation, funding, and physical commemoration would lead to greater equity and investment in historically disadvantaged communities that have faced centuries of racism, discrimination, environmental and climate injustices, and violence.
Section 3 would add a National Freedom Settlements Preservation Program chapter to title 54 of federal law.
Division B of subtitle III of title 54, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: 3092 National Freedom Settlements Preservation Program
The operative definition covers communities established by formerly enslaved African Americans after emancipation, also called Freedmen’s Settlements, Freedom Colonies, or Black Towns. The purpose statement uses broader language that also mentions free African Americans and their descendants.
The term Freedom Settlement means a community established by formerly enslaved African Americans following emancipation (also commonly referred to as ‘Freedmen’s Settlements’, Freedom Colonies, or ‘Black Towns’).
recognize the importance of Freedom Settlements, including communities established by formerly enslaved people, free African Americans, and their descendants
The stated purpose includes authorizing the Interior Secretary to coordinate federal and nonfederal work to research, preserve, commemorate, and explain settlement history.
authorize the Secretary of the Interior to coordinate and facilitate Federal and non-Federal activities to identify, research, record, preserve, commemorate, honor, and interpret the history of Freedom Settlements
The Secretary would have to establish the program and develop its grant program in consultation with organizations, experts, and community leaders serving African-American communities; organizations involved with settlements; and settlement residents and their descendants.
The Secretary shall establish within the Service a program to be known as the National Freedom Settlements Preservation Program.
the Secretary shall develop a program for the provision of grants in accordance with section 309204(a), in consultation with— (1) organizations, experts, and community leaders who serve African-American communities; (2) organizations involved with Freedom Settlements; and (3) residents and descendants of residents of Freedom Settlements.
The Secretary could accept donated money, services, or property to carry out the chapter.
The Secretary may accept donations of funds, services, or property for the purposes of carrying out this chapter.
A settlement could be considered for a grant only with the applicable property owner’s consent and a request from an individual, landowner, organization, government, or other entity.
Freedom Settlements may only be considered for a grant under the Program— (1) with the consent of the owner of the applicable property; and (2) at the request of an individual, landowner, private or nonprofit organization, State, Tribal, or local government, or other entity.
The Secretary could consider settlement-related National Park Service units and programs, historic properties, and governmental or nongovernmental educational, research, or interpretive facilities and programs for inclusion.
The Secretary may consider the following for inclusion in the Program: (1) All units and programs of the National Park Service determined by the Secretary to pertain to Freedom Settlements. (2) Historic properties pertaining to Freedom Settlements. (3) Other governmental and nongovernmental facilities and programs of an educational, research, or interpretive nature that are directly related to Freedom Settlements.
Grants could support identifying qualifying settlements, preserving and restoring their heritage, developing tourism programs, researching and documenting settlements, building the ability to operate and maintain recognized sites, and teaching settlement history. Awards would be permitted, rather than guaranteed.
the Secretary may award grants to eligible entities described in subsection (b)(1) for— (1) the identification of Freedom Settlements that may qualify for the Program; (2) cultural and heritage preservation, restoration, and tourism program development of Freedom Settlements; (3) related research and documentation of Freedom Settlements; (4) capacity-building to operate and maintain recognized Freedom Settlement sites; and (5) educational programming about Freedom Settlement history.
Eligible grant applicants would include owners of settlement-associated property; Tribal, state, and local governments; and community organizations demonstrating local leadership and commitment to community development.
Each of the following entities are eligible for a grant under the Program: (A) A property owner of a property associated with Freedom Settlements. (B) Tribal, State, or local governments. (C) Community organizations that have demonstrated local leadership and a commitment to community development.
Applicants would have to submit an application meeting the Secretary’s timing, format, and information requirements.
To be eligible for a grant under this section, an eligible entity shall submit to the Secretary an application at such time, in such manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may require.
The bill would authorize $3 million for the grant section in each fiscal year from 2026 through 2031. An authorization permits Congress to provide funding through appropriations; this provision would not itself supply the funds.
There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section $3,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2026 through 2031.
The Secretary would have to study key sites illustrating the establishment of Freedom Settlements to provide education, security, and belonging denied under slavery and discriminatory laws. The sites studied must also be potentially suitable for the program.
The Secretary shall conduct a study to identify key sites that— (1) illustrate the period in American history when formerly enslaved African Americans established Freedom Settlements to provide their communities with education, security, and belonging which were previously denied under slavery and discriminatory laws; and (2) may be suitable for inclusion in the Program.
The study would require public involvement and consultation with the advisory committee, state and local officials, educational institutions, and other interested organizations and individuals.
The Study shall be conducted with public involvement and in consultation with— (1) the Advisory Committee; (2) State and local officials; (3) educational institutions; and (4) other interested organizations and individuals.
The Secretary would maintain and regularly update a comprehensive settlement registry as sites are identified and verified through research and documentation. The text gives a nonexclusive list of examples, beginning with Nicodemus, Kansas, and Africatown, Alabama.
The Secretary shall maintain and regularly update a comprehensive registry of Freedom Settlements, as they are identified and verified through the research and documentation process outlined in this chapter, including but not limited to historically documented settlements engaged in preservation efforts, such as— (1) Nicodemus, Kansas; (2) Africatown, Alabama;
The chapter would not authorize the Secretary to require or affect private-property management or use without the owner’s written consent.
Nothing in this chapter— (1) authorizes the Secretary to require or affect the management or use of private property without the written consent of the owner of the private property;
The private-property protection would still allow land-management guidance or requirements as conditions of a grant to the property owner.
Nothing in this chapter—
(2) prohibits the Secretary from providing land management guidance or requirements relating to private property as a condition of a grant provided to the owner of the private property under this chapter.
The Secretary could enter cooperation agreements and provide technical assistance to governments, African American-serving groups, settlement residents and descendants, scholars, nonprofits, educational institutions, and private entities. The Chisholm Legacy Project, Ubuntu Climate, and Texas Freedom Colonies Project are named as nonprofit examples.
The Secretary may enter into cooperative agreements and memoranda of understanding with, and provide technical assistance to, the heads of other Federal agencies, States, units of local government, Tribal governments, regional governmental bodies, African American-serving groups, residents and descendants of residents of Freedom Settlements, scholars of this specific history, and nonprofit organizations such as the Chisholm Legacy Project, Ubuntu Climate, and the Texas Freedom Colonies Project, educational institutions, and private entities
These agreements and assistance would serve the chapter’s purposes, support cooperation with the advisory committee, and coordinate assisted federal and nonfederal participants with park-system units and programs.
(1) to achieve the purposes of this chapter; (2) to facilitate cooperation with the Advisory Committee; and (3) to ensure effective coordination of the Federal elements and non-Federal elements provided a grant or other assistance under the Program with System units and programs of the Service.
The Secretary would have to establish a Freedom Settlements Advisory Committee to assist with the study.
In carrying out the Study under section 309205, the Secretary shall establish a committee to be known as the Freedom Settlements Advisory Committee to assist with the Study.
The Secretary would appoint committee members who are settlement residents or descendants, have expertise in African-American or Reconstruction or Jim Crow era history, or are community leaders and advocates for African-American heritage, preservation, and development. These are alternative qualifications.
The Advisory Committee shall be composed of members, appointed by the Secretary, who— (1) are residents or descendants of residents of Freedom Settlements; (2) have demonstrated expertise in— (A) African-American history; or (B) Reconstruction or Jim Crow era history; or (3) are community leaders and advocates for African-American community heritage, preservation, and development.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated February 6, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Natural Resources on February 27, 2025. It does not establish subsequent advancement or enactment.
Source snapshot updated 2026-02-06T19:41:24Z. 2025-02-27: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources. 2025-02-27: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-27. 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 rider was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish attachment history or the contents of 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 allocation for a particular recipient or place was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version; formal earmark status cannot be fully assessed without accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow carve-out, special exemption, or preferential treatment beyond the program’s intended coverage and routine administration was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion applies only to that version.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Feb 6, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI