This is a question that was posed to the Airspace Policy Group at the FAA back in July of 2019. We actually asked them to look at two, P-67 was one of them and R-6413 in Utah was the other. With regards to R-6413, they determined that there was sufficient justification for keeping it. They stated that they would examine our question concerning P-67 and determine the proper course of action.
We've had some changing of the guard in Government Affairs since then. I will ask if we've ever received a response on this query and post what I find.
...I don't know if they issue TFRs for former presidents...
They do -- see the one over Former President GW Bush's office in Dallas, just south of Addison (KADS) -- but just a little bitty one (1500-1), and if you're talking to ADS Tower or Regional Approach (as you should be in that location, as it's on the final for ADS and inside the DFW Class B surface area), you're already covered..
I'm sure you've already thought of it, but you could argue a TFR would be more appropriate for when he is present rather than a full-time prohibited area. However, I don't know if they issue TFRs for former presidents (I don't remember ever seeing one) so perhaps it's a bit of legal/policy complication. (i.e. all or nothing.)
It's not a significant amount of airspace, but there are two reasons for my interest: (a) making sure these restrictions get cleaned up in a reasonable timeframe in general so they don't just keep accumulating, (2) I would hate for a AOPA member to receive a violation for an airspace that is not really in use. As to the second one, hopefully the compliance philosophy would win the day and the FAA would grant some relief to anyone that accidentally violates it in the future.
Again, no follow up question, just a big thank you for your work!
There was a more recent FAA response from January of 2020. In this response the FAA stated that they coordinated with the United States Secret Service (USSS) concerning our P-67 inquiry. The USSS stated that G.W. Bush still uses the property and because of this there is a continuing requirement to retain the prohibited area.
We have reached out to the FAA for an update (since its been a year) and see if anything has changed.