Overview

Title

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource study of the Cahokia Mounds and surrounding land in the States of Illinois and Missouri, and for other purposes.

ELI5 AI

In this bill, the government wants to learn more about a special place called Cahokia Mounds, where people lived a long time ago. They plan to study if it can become a park and how to take care of it with help from different groups.

Summary AI

S. 4164 aims to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a detailed study of the Cahokia Mounds and surrounding areas in Illinois and Missouri. These sites are of historical significance, being part of the ancient Mississippian culture. The study will evaluate the feasibility of recognizing these lands as part of the National Park System and will explore alternative methods for their preservation and interpretation, including options involving federal, state, local, and private entities. The findings and recommendations from this study must be reported to Congress within one year using existing National Park Service funds.

Published

2024-11-21
Congress: 118
Session: 2
Chamber: SENATE
Status: Reported to Senate
Date: 2024-11-21
Package ID: BILLS-118s4164rs

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
7
Words:
1,491
Pages:
10
Sentences:
22

Language

Nouns: 465
Verbs: 82
Adjectives: 62
Adverbs: 11
Numbers: 64
Entities: 140

Complexity

Average Token Length:
4.03
Average Sentence Length:
67.77
Token Entropy:
4.84
Readability (ARI):
34.57

AnalysisAI

General Summary of the Bill

The bill titled "Cahokia Mounds Mississippian Culture Study Act" aims to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource study of the Cahokia Mounds site, located in Illinois and Missouri, along with its surrounding areas. The primary focus is to evaluate the historical and cultural significance of this site and to determine whether it should be designated as part of the National Park System. The study will explore preservation options, involve consultation with various stakeholders, and provide cost estimates for managing the area. The results and recommendations of the study are to be reported to the relevant Congressional committees within one year after funds are made available.

Summary of Significant Issues

Several significant issues arise from the bill's provisions. Firstly, the process for determining the suitability and feasibility of designating the study area as a national park unit lacks clear criteria, which might lead to subjective interpretations. This absence of detail can affect how decisions are made about the future of the site.

Moreover, the timeline for completing the study is limited to one year, which may be unrealistic given the complexity and scope of the task. Rushing the process could result in incomplete or inadequate evaluations. Additionally, the requirement to use existing funds from the National Park Service without detailing additional funding sources could strain resources and impact other projects.

The section mandates consultations with a broad range of entities and individuals, but it fails to specify criteria for selecting these stakeholders. This omission potentially opens doors to bias or favoritism in who gets to influence the study. Furthermore, while it highlights preservation alternatives via private and nonprofit organizations, the absence of evaluation guidelines could lead to uneven assessments or favoritism.

Impact on the Public

Broadly, this bill has the potential to impact the public positively by preserving a significant historical and cultural site. Formal recognition and integration into the National Park System could increase public awareness and appreciation of the site's value. However, if the study does not receive adequate resources or time, the benefits might not fully materialize, thereby failing to realize the site's potential as a cultural and educational asset for the public.

Moreover, the potential for strain on existing National Park Service resources might indirectly affect current public services or sites by diverting attention and funds.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

Local Communities: Residents and businesses near the Cahokia Mounds might experience both positive and negative impacts. An influx of tourists could boost the local economy through increased business for retail and hospitality sectors. However, increased traffic and potential changes in land use may disrupt local life.

Indigenous Peoples and Cultural Authorities: As the Cahokia Mounds are significant to various Indigenous groups, recognition as part of the National Park System could enhance the preservation of their cultural heritage. Concerns might arise regarding oversight and representation, ensuring that Indigenous voices are appropriately included in the consultation process.

Government Entities and Conservation Organizations: Federal, state, and local governmental bodies along with private conservation entities could find themselves engaged in collaborations for preservation efforts. The requirement to consult with these groups highlights an opportunity for collaborative preservation and educational programs.

In summary, while the bill sets a framework for studying and potentially enhancing the status of the Cahokia Mounds, it presents logistical challenges that might affect its execution. The outcomes could have significant cultural, educational, and economic implications depending on how effectively the study's provisions are implemented.

Issues

  • The lack of explicit criteria for determining the 'suitability and feasibility' of designating the Study Area as a unit of the National Park System may lead to subjective interpretation, affecting the decision-making process. This issue is tied to Section 4.

  • The timeline for completing and reporting the special resource study within one year from the availability of funds may be unrealistic given the potential complexity and scope of the evaluation required. This could result in rushed or incomplete work. This concern arises from Section 4.

  • The section requires the study to be executed in accordance with section 100507 of title 54, United States Code, but there is no elaboration on what this entails, requiring readers to look up the law themselves, which might obscure understanding. This is relevant to Section 4.

  • The mandate to use existing funds of the National Park Service without specifying additional funding might strain existing resources, potentially impacting other projects or operations. This financial issue is connected to Section 4.

  • The process outlined for consulting with a broad range of entities and individuals lacks specific criteria, which leaves room for potential bias or favoritism in selecting who participates or influences the study. This issue can be found in Section 4.

  • The bill does not set a clear budget or financial limit for the study, opening the possibility for wasteful spending. This financial issue relates to Section 3.

  • Evaluation of alternatives for preservation by private and nonprofit organizations without clear criteria or guidelines might lead to favoritism or biases. This concern is found in Section 3.

Sections

Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.

1. Short title Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The first section of the bill states that it may be referred to as the "Cahokia Mounds Mississippian Culture Study Act."

2. Findings Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

Congress notes that the ancient city of Cahokia was a significant urban center of the Mississippian culture, with many earthen mounds built between 900 and 1400 AD, making it a historically important site recognized as a National Historic Landmark and a UNESCO World Heritage Site. At its peak, Cahokia spanned 6 square miles, housed 10,000 to 20,000 people, and was a larger city than many in Europe at the time.

3. Definitions Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section defines key terms for the Act, explaining that the "Secretary" refers to the Secretary of the Interior, and the "Study Area" includes the Cahokia Mounds site, nearby land in certain Illinois and Missouri counties, thematically connected satellite sites, and several specific mounds such as Mitchell Mound and Emerald Mound.

4. Special resource study Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The Secretary is tasked with conducting a special study of a designated area to evaluate its importance, assess if it should be part of the National Park System, and explore preservation options. This study will involve consultation with various entities, cost estimation, and must be completed within a year using existing National Park Service funds. The results and recommendations will be reported to the Senate and House Committees.

1. Short title Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The first section of the Act states that the official name of the Act is the "Cahokia Mounds Mississippian Culture Study Act."

2. Definitions Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section defines terms used in the Act, including "Secretary," which refers to the Secretary of the Interior, and "Study Area," which encompasses the Cahokia Mounds site and nearby regions in Illinois and Missouri. The Study Area also includes certain satellite sites connected to Cahokia Mounds.

3. Special resource study Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The Secretary is tasked with conducting a special resource study of a specified area to assess its national importance, consider the potential for it to become part of the National Park System, evaluate other preservation options, consult relevant stakeholders, and estimate costs. The study will follow U.S. legal guidelines, and the results along with conclusions and recommendations must be reported to the Senate and House energy and natural resources committees within a year of funding availability.