The Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area: An Example of How Pork-Barrel Politics Can Threaten Local Rule and Property Rights, by Peyton Knight

Just one year after the U.S. Supreme Court’s dreadful Kelo v. City of New London decision that sparked a national outcry against government eminent domain abuse, some in Congress are preparing to bring a new threat to property owners in Virginia, West Virginia, Maryland and Pennsylvania.

Congressman Frank Wolf (R-VA) wants to transform the entire Route 15 corridor, from Charlottesville, Virginia to Gettysburg, Pennsylvania into a National Heritage Area (the “Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area Act,” H.R. 5195).  National Heritage Areas are best described as preservation zones, where the National Park Service and designated preservationist groups team up to influence how an area is developed (or not developed).

According to Representative Wolf, “The Journey Through Hallowed Ground Corridor holds more American history than any other region in the country and its recognition as a National Heritage Area will elevate its national prominence, as deserved.”  He also claims this initiative is an “effort to create economic opportunity by celebrating the unique place in American history this region holds.”1 

However, Representative Wolf’s flowery, innocuous rhetoric is little more than sheep’s clothing used to disguise what amounts to a pork-barrel earmark awarded to preservationist interest groups.  Worse yet, instead of merely providing pork, Representative Wolf’s earmark is purchasing lobbyists.

H.R. 5195 would essentially deputize the National Trust for Historic Preservation (NTHP), along with other like-minded preservationist groups and the Park Service, to oversee land use policy in the corridor.  This consortium of preservation elitists and federal bureaucrats would form a “management entity,”2 and be given a federal mandate to create an “inventory” of all property in the area that it wants “preserved,” “managed” or “acquired” because of its “national historic significance.”3

In an effort to downplay concerns from property rights advocates, a spokesperson for the Journey Through Hallowed Ground (JTHG) Partnership (the umbrella group that is spearheading the Heritage Area effort), claims, “A National Heritage Area… does not interfere with the local authority at all.”4  Such a statement signifies either extreme ignorance of the legislation, or outright dishonesty.  In reality, the Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area Act is specifically designed to interfere with local authorities.

The “management entity” would have the authority to disburse federal moneys to “States and their political subdivisions” to promote land use policies that are favored by the entity5 (including land acquisition) in Virginia, West Virginia, Maryland and Pennsylvania.  However, taxpayers would not vote on the entity’s leadership or have a say in its direction.  In addition, eligibility for membership in the board of directors of the “management entity” would be limited to members of the partnership just prior to the legislation’s enactment. 

The special interests couldn’t ask for much more than what Representative Wolf is providing them:  A congressionally ordained, members-only club, funded by taxpayers, for the express purpose of making taxpayers live under the club’s rules. 

The bill lists as one of its “purposes” that all “significant historic, cultural and recreational sites in the Heritage Area” should be managed “in a manner consistent with compatible economic development.”6  And, of course, which sites are deemed “significant” and which types of development are deemed “compatible” is up to the discretion of the JTHG conglomerate. 

One of the chief beneficiaries of Representative Wolf’s earmark is The National Trust for Historic Preservation, an organization with a clear anti-property rights agenda.  Peter Brink, senior vice president of The National Trust, also serves as Vice-Chairman of JTHG’s Board of Directors.

As author James Bovard has observed: “Preservationists have ‘progressed’ from targeting specific buildings to targeting neighborhoods and even entire valleys and states for strict, government-enforced controls… The National Trust for Historic Preservation, the premier preservationist organization, has gone from seeking to educate Americans about historic treasures to clamoring for maximum restrictions on private land use across the nation.”7 

In a much publicized case last year, a Louisa, Virginia man who simply wanted to renovate his home ran into stiff opposition from NTHP.  Emily Wadhams, The National Trust’s vice president for public policy, argued against the rights of the homeowner in a hearing on Capitol Hill, testifying, “[P]rivate property rights have never been allowed to take precedence over our shared national values and the preservation of our country’s heritage.”8 

There is little doubt that those who make this ground “hallowed” would take umbrage with Wadham’s brash attempt at revisionist history.  Thomas Jefferson once said, “The true foundation of republican government is the equal right of every citizen in his person and property and in their management.”9  Yet, Wadham’s words and NTHP’s deeds make it clear:  Fundamental property rights are merely inconvenient barriers to the National Trust’s rigid management agenda. 

The National Trust has worked to defeat state ballot initiatives designed to restore the private property rights of landowners.  For instance, citizens in both Oregon and Washington have had to contend with the National Trust political machine in their battle to receive fair compensation when government devalues their land by taking their property rights.10

The group also vehemently opposes common sense road improvements.  NTHP lobbied to kill plans for a much-needed “outer connector” that would have brought traffic relief to the heavily congested area near Chancellorsville Battlefield in Spotsylvania County, Virginia.11  Why?  According to the National Trust, the connector “would pass within a mile of the park boundary.”12  How, exactly, a road one mile away from the battlefield would harm it is not clear.

The Journey Through Hallowed Ground debate is about more than how land in the area should be managed.  It is a question of who should be doing the managing:  Local officials and the citizens to whom they are directly accountable or unaccountable special interest groups and equally unaccountable federal bureaucrats?

We should never seek to honor the heroes of our nation’s founding by trampling the sacred principles for which they fought and died – namely property rights and limited, local government.

Peyton Knight is The National Center for Public Policy Research’s director of environmental and regulatory affairs.


1 “Legislation Sponsored to Establish The Journey as National Heritage Area,” Press Release, The Journey Through Hallowed Ground Partnership, Waterford, Virginia, April 10, 2006, available at as of June 8, 2006.

2 H.R. 5195, the “Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area Act of 2006,” Sec. 2(a)(3) and Sec. 3(c).

Sec. 2(a)(3): “In 1996, a collaborative public-private partnership effort, including the National Trust for Historic Preservation, the National Park Service, Scenic America, private citizens, and a 4 State coalition of local and regional governmental and private sector organizations began work to assess historic sites along the Route 15 Area. The initiative issued a comprehensive study of significant sites and structures (cataloguing over 7,000 buildings already on the National Register of Historic Places) in the Heritage Area associated with Native American, African American, European American, Colonial American, Revolutionary, and Civil War history, and concluded that the sites possess historical, cultural, and architectural value of national significance and retain a high degree of historical integrity.”

Sec. 3(c): “Management Entity- The management entity for the Heritage Area shall be The Journey Through Hallowed Ground Partnership, a Virginia corporation, the Board of Directors of which shall include representatives from a broad cross-section of the individuals, agencies, organizations, States, and governments that were involved in the planning and development of the Heritage Area before the date of enactment of this Act and which shall oversee the development of a management plan in accordance with section 5(b).”

3 H.R. 5195, Sec. 5(b)(5): “Management Plan- The management entity shall develop a management plan for the Heritage Area that – includes an inventory of the property and resources in the Heritage Area that should be preserved, restored, supported, managed, developed, maintained, or acquired because of its national historic significance.”

4 Cheryl K. Chumley, “Land Rights Activists Question Journey Through Hallowed Ground Bill,” Fauquier Times-Democrat, June 6, 2006, available at on June 8, 2006.

5 H.R. 5195, Sec. 5(a): “Authorities of the Management Entity-

(1) AUTHORITY TO ACCEPT FUNDS- The management entity may accept funds from any Federal source and from States and their political subdivisions, private organizations, non-profit organizations, or any other person to carry out its authorities and duties under this Act.

(2) USE OF FUNDS- The management entity may use funds made available under this Act for purposes of preparing, updating, and implementing the management plan developed under subsection (b). Such purposes may include the following:

(A) Making grants to, and entering into cooperative agreements with, States and their political subdivisions, private organizations, non-profit organizations or any other person.

(B) Hiring and compensating staff.

(C) Entering into contracts for goods and services.

(D) Acquisition of lands or interests in lands by gift, devise, or by purchase from a willing seller using donated or appropriated funds. No lands or interests in lands may be acquired by condemnation.

(E) Undertaking any other initiatives that advance the purposes of the Heritage Area.”

6 H.R. 5195, Sec. 2(b)(5):  “Purpose- The purposes of the Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area are – to enhance a cooperative management framework to assist the Commonwealth of Virginia, the State of Maryland, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the State of West Virginia, and their units of local government, the private sector, and area citizens in conserving, supporting, enhancing, and interpreting the significant historic, cultural and recreational sites in the Heritage Area in a manner consistent with compatible economic development for the benefit and inspiration of present and future generations.”

7 James Bovard, “Don’t Touch That Style!” The American Spectator, April 1997, available at on June 8, 2006.

8 Emily Wadhams, Testimony Before the Committee on Resources Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C., April 21, 2005, available at on June 8, 2006.

9 Peter Boettke, Ph.D., “The Role of Private Property in a Free Society,” Virginia Viewpoint, Virginia Institute for Public Policy, Gainesville, Virginia, April 2005, available at on June 8, 2006.

10 Peyton Knight, “Historically Untrustworthy,” Foundation Watch, Capital Research Center, Washington, D.C., November 2005, available at as of June 8, 2006.

11 Linda Wheeler, “Developer Runs Into Stonewall; Plan to Build Community at Chancellorsville Sets Up Fight With Preservationists,” The Washington Post, p. B07, July 31, 2002.

12 “11 Most Endangered Places: Chancellorsville Battlefield,” The National Trust for Historic Preservation, Washington, D.C., available at on June 8, 2006.

The National Center for Public Policy Research is a communications and research foundation supportive of a strong national defense and dedicated to providing free market solutions to today’s public policy problems. We believe that the principles of a free market, individual liberty and personal responsibility provide the greatest hope for meeting the challenges facing America in the 21st century.