This bill adds a single sentence to 16 U.S.C. 6804(a)(2): the image on the America the Beautiful—the National Parks and Federal Recreational Lands Pass may not include any living current or former elected official or other living political figure. It also removes the existing heading word “COMPETITION” from that subsection.
The change is narrowly focused on the visual content of the federal recreation pass and is intended to prevent the pass from displaying living partisan actors. For federal land managers, pass vendors, and designers, the amendment creates an affirmative content restriction that will need to be operationalized in design competitions, procurement, and inventory of existing pass stock.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill amends section 805(a)(2) of the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act to add a prohibition: the America the Beautiful pass may not include the image of any living current or former elected official or other living political figure. It also deletes the subsection heading “COMPETITION.”
Who It Affects
Federal land management agencies that issue the pass (National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Reclamation), contractors and artists who design pass artwork, and organizations that run design competitions or promotional programs tied to the pass.
Why It Matters
This is a targeted content rule for a highly visible, government-issued item. It changes how agencies screen imagery and run design processes, raises definitional and enforcement questions, and could set a model for restricting political imagery on other federal materials.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill makes a concise, textual change to the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act. It inserts a new sentence into the provision that governs the National Parks and Federal Recreational Lands Pass design, forbidding any image on the pass that depicts a living elected official or any other living person described as a political figure.
The bill does not provide definitions, exemptions, or procedures; it simply creates the substantive prohibition.
Practically, agencies that oversee the America the Beautiful pass will need to alter their internal design-review and procurement practices. That includes vetting proposed images, updating solicitation language for design competitions or commissions, and deciding how to treat currently produced passes that include pictures of living figures if any exist.
The deletion of the word “COMPETITION” from the subsection heading is a textual change that may signal removal of a prior emphasis on design contests, but the statutory text otherwise remains limited to the new content rule.Because the bill provides no implementing guidance, agencies will have to translate the prohibition into operational rules: how to define “political figure,” how to determine whether a person is living, whether depictions of crowds or indistinct portraits are covered, and whether there is any process for appeals or waivers. The statute does not attach fines or criminal penalties; enforcement would be administrative—preventing issuance of a pass with a disallowed image or requiring redesign.
The lack of exceptions or transitional language means agencies will also need to decide whether existing inventory or pre-ordered passes are exempt from the new rule.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill amends 16 U.S.C. 6804(a)(2) — the subsection governing the America the Beautiful pass — by adding a one-sentence prohibition on images of living political figures.
It bars images of living current or former elected officials and also forbids images of “other living political figure[s],” language left undefined in the bill text.
The statute’s subsection heading is altered: the word “COMPETITION” is removed from section 805(a)(2)’s heading.
The bill contains no definitions, no waiver or appeal procedure, and no transitional or grandfathering clause for passes already produced or distributed.
No penalties or enforcement mechanism are specified; compliance would be administrative and implementable through agency design standards and procurement controls.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Establishes the Act’s name as the 'Prohibit Partisan Park Passes Act.' This is a standard one-line naming provision and carries no operational effect beyond the statute's title.
Removes 'COMPETITION' from the subsection heading
The bill instructs that the existing subsection heading include no reference to 'COMPETITION.' That is a narrow textual edit: it does not, by itself, repeal any authority for competitions or change substantive requirements. However, because headings guide agency interpretation and public-facing program materials, this editorial change may prompt agencies to review how they advertise or administer design solicitations tied to the pass.
Prohibits images of living political figures on the pass
The core change appends: 'The image used on the National Parks and Federal Recreational Lands Pass may not include a living current or former elected official or other living political figure.' This creates a categorical content exclusion for the pass. The provision does not define 'political figure,' does not indicate who determines whether a person falls into that category, and does not establish an exception for non-political appearances (for example, a living scientist pictured in a landscape). Agencies will need to operationalize these gaps via internal guidance, procurement clauses, or rulemaking.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Government across all five countries.
Explore Government in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Federal land visitors and users who prefer nonpartisan government images: removes potential perceptions of endorsement or politicization on a widely used federal item.
- Federal land agencies seeking to avoid controversy: provides a simple statutory rule to justify rejecting contested designs and reduces risk of public criticism tied to using images of living politicians.
- Organizations that promote nonpartisan imagery (e.g., conservation NGOs focused on landscapes): increases emphasis on nature- or heritage-based visuals that align with their mission and may provide more opportunities for their imagery to be selected.
Who Bears the Cost
- Federal land management agencies (NPS, USFS, BLM, FWS, BOR): must draft and implement vetting procedures, update solicitations and contracts, and potentially handle inventory adjustments—creating administrative and compliance costs.
- Designers, photographers, and contractors: will face new content restrictions in solicitations and may need to withdraw or revise submissions, affecting creative processes and revenue for commissioned work involving living figures.
- Living public figures, nominees, and advocacy groups: lose a channel for recognition or fundraising tied to pass imagery and may challenge exclusions, generating legal and political costs for agencies if disputes arise.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill pits a legitimate public-interest goal—keeping a federal, widely distributed item free of contemporary partisan signaling—against the costs of a categorical content ban: administrative burdens, ambiguous coverage of who counts as a 'political figure,' and potential legal friction over restricting the depiction of living people on government materials.
The bill is procedurally lean but legally blunt: it establishes a bright-line ban without resolving basic implementation questions. The absence of definitions for 'other living political figure' leaves room for wide interpretation.
Agencies must decide whether that phrase includes appointed officeholders, campaign operatives, lobbyists, public advocates, prominent local officials, or even well-known community leaders who engage in policy debates. Those interpretive choices will drive who is effectively excluded.
Enforcement is another open question. The statute imposes no criminal or civil penalty; compliance will depend on administrative screening—rejecting disallowed artwork before printing or sale.
That approach is straightforward, but it creates operational burdens (image clearance processes, contractor warranties, indemnities) and potential backlogs. The restriction also raises constitutional questions in the margins: because the pass is government-issued and uses government funds, agencies have substantial leeway to control its content as government speech, but categorical exclusions based on political status could attract litigation over viewpoint or equal protection claims if applied inconsistently.
Furthermore, the lack of transitional language could create practical problems for passes already in circulation or in production when the rule takes effect.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.