Randy Weber (R-TX)
Lone Star Coastal National Recreation Area Act
A Republican bill with 1 Democratic cosponsor · See all 6 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill establishes the Lone Star Coastal National Recreation Area as part of the National Park System to protect the Upper and Middle Texas Gulf Coast. It aims to promote outdoor recreation, like hunting and fishing, and support the local economy through heritage tourism. The area will be managed through a partnership of federal, state, local, and private entities. Land acquisition is limited to voluntary methods, and condemnation is strictly prohibited. The bill also protects existing private property rights and current economic activities.
Yes· 3 of 22
- Scored +7
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?
Supports rural economic development and protects local property rights.
- Scored +7
Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests?
Establishes a new unit of the National Park System for conservation and recreation.
- Scored +6
Would business owners be better off under this?
Benefits those in the tourism and recreation sectors.
The opposite
- Scored -3
Does this reduce how much oil, gas and coal is produced?
Explicitly protects the continued use and maintenance of oil and gas pipelines and projects.
- Scored -1
Does this reduce what the federal government spends?
Authorizes new appropriations for the establishment and management of the recreation area.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Economic Support for Local Communities: The bill aims to support the local economy and rural communities by promoting heritage tourism and outdoor recreation (Section 2).
-
Increased Public Access: It promotes the expansion of opportunities for outdoor recreation, specifically mentioning hunting and fishing (Section 2).
-
Environmental Protection: The bill focuses on protecting the long-term health of the natural coastal ecosystem and significant flora and fauna (Section 2).
-
Financial Assistance for Projects: The Secretary can provide technical and financial assistance for projects involving resource protection, education, and outdoor recreation, covering up to 25 percent of the cost (Section 5).
-
Protection of Private Property Rights: Landowners will not be subject to new regulations, including the Endangered Species Act, as a result of this designation (Section 8).
-
Preservation of Energy Infrastructure: The bill ensures that the designation does not impede the use or maintenance of oil and gas pipelines and projects (Section 8).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Federal Reimbursement Requirements: If a project funded by the Secretary is later converted or used for purposes inconsistent with the Act, the U.S. government has the right to reimbursement for the funds provided or the increase in the project's value (Section 5).
-
Strict Matching Fund Requirements: To receive federal funds under a cooperative agreement, there must be a match of at least three non-Federal dollars for every one Federal dollar (Section 5).
-
Potential for Use Restrictions: While generally permitting hunting and fishing, the Secretary may temporarily restrict these uses for public safety and emergency situations (Section 8).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Supports rural economic development and protects local property rights. Would business owners be better off under this? — Benefits those in the tourism and recreation sectors. Would gun owners be better off under this? — Specifically protects and promotes hunting opportunities within the area. Would farmers be better off under this? — Protects private property rights and prohibits land condemnation. Would children be better off under this? — Provides more outdoor recreational and educational opportunities. Would high-income households be better off under this? — Increases public access to outdoor recreation. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Increases public access to outdoor recreation. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Provides more outdoor recreational opportunities. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Increases public access to outdoor recreation. Would retired people be better off under this? — Provides more recreational opportunities. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Provides more outdoor recreational opportunities. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Provides more recreational destinations. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Provides more outdoor recreational opportunities.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests? — Establishes a new unit of the National Park System for conservation and recreation. Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — Protects the long-term health of the natural coastal ecosystem and significant flora and fauna. Does this invest in rural communities? — Supports rural communities through heritage tourism and federal financial assistance for projects. Does this improve help for people hit by a disaster? — Ensures the designation does not preempt or alter FEMA's responsibilities or hurricane response efforts. Does this reduce how much oil, gas and coal is produced? — Explicitly protects the continued use and maintenance of oil and gas pipelines and projects.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to grow the economy? — Supports the local economy and rural communities through increased tourism and recreation. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Benefits local businesses catering to heritage tourism and outdoor recreation. Is this likely to create jobs? — Promotes heritage tourism and outdoor recreation which can stimulate local employment. Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — Authorizes new appropriations for the establishment and management of the recreation area.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this leave more decisions to the states? — Protects state jurisdiction over fish and wildlife and requires consultation with the Governor of Texas. Does this give the federal government more power? — Increases federal oversight through the creation of a National Park System unit, though heavily mitigated by voluntary participation.
- 10/6/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/15/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/30/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/15/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Brian BabinRepublican · Texas
Jake EllzeyRepublican · Texas
Lizzie FletcherDemocrat · Texas
Wesley HuntRepublican · Texas
Troy NehlsRepublican · Texas
Beth Van DuyneRepublican · Texas