PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jan 21, 1999
Directs the Secretary of the Interior to: (1) facilitate the development of guidelines and a program of technical assistance and grants that will set priorities for the preservation of the Route 66 corridor; (2) designate National Park Service (NPS) officials to perform the functions of the Cultural Resource Programs (NPS programs to support cultural resources related to the corridor); (3) support efforts of State and local public and private persons, nonprofit Route 66 preservation entities, Indian tribes, State Historic Preservation Offices, and entities in the States to preserve the corridor by providing technical assistance, participating in cost-sharing programs, and making grants; (4) act as a clearinghouse for communication among such parties and Federal, State, and local agencies; and (5) assist the States in determining the appropriate form of, and establishing and supporting, a non-Federal entity or entities to perform the functions of the Cultural Resource Programs after those programs are terminated. Authorizes the Secretary to enter into cooperative agreements, accept donations, provide cost-share grants and information and technical assistance in historic preservation, and conduct research. Requires the Secretary: (1) to provide assistance in the preservation of the corridor that is compatible with the idiosyncratic nature of the highway; (2) not to prepare or require an overall management plan, but to cooperate with public and private entities in developing local preservation plans to guide efforts to protect the most important or representative resources of the corridor; (3) to develop a technical assistance program in the preservation of Route 66, including guidelines for setting priorities for preservation needs; (4) to coordinate a program of historic research, curation, preservation strategies, and collection of oral and video histories of events that occurred along the corridor designed for continuing use after the Cultural Resource Programs are terminated; (5) to make available cost-share grants for the preservation of the corridor for resources that meet the guidelines under the technical assistance program; and (6) provide information about existing cost-share opportunities. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Sen. Domenici, Pete V. [R-NM] · R–NM
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S3568, S3570-3571)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S3568, S3570-3571)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 47.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Murkowski without amendment. With written report No. 106-20.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Murkowski without amendment. With written report No. 106-20.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Referred to Subcommittee on Parks, Preservation and Recreation.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S862-863)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 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 S.292 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 S.292 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 S.292 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 S.292 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.