Thomas Kean (R-NJ)
Expressing support for maintaining the designation of the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area.
A Republican resolution with 1 Democratic cosponsor · See the cosponsor
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
A House resolution is the House speaking for itself: stating a position, honouring someone, or setting its own rules. Adopting it is the whole process. Once the House agrees to it, it is officially the House's word; it is not a law, so the Senate and the President have no part in it.
What this bill would do
This resolution expresses support for maintaining the current designation of the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area. The area spans nearly 70,000 acres across New Jersey and Pennsylvania and offers various recreational opportunities. The resolution opposes proposals to change the designation to a national park and preserve. It argues that such a change could limit recreational access and reduce cooperation with local communities. Finally, the House expresses its sense that the area should remain a national recreation area and that no funds should be used for redesignation.
Yes· 3 of 5
- Scored +7
Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests?
The bill preserves a management model that emphasizes cooperation with local municipalities to prevent resource strain.
- Scored +7
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?
The resolution aims to prevent economic loss and infrastructure strain on surrounding local communities.
- Scored +6
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
The resolution opposes centralized federal management in favor of local community cooperation.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Maintaining Recreational Access: Keeping the current designation protects the freedom of visitors and local residents to enjoy activities like fishing, hunting, hiking, boating, camping, and canoeing (Whereas clause 2 and 5; Resolved clause 1 and 2).
-
Community Cooperation: Maintaining the status quo preserves the longstanding cooperative relationship between Federal agencies and surrounding municipalities and gateway communities (Whereas clause s[4] and [5]; Resolved clause 3).
-
Economic and Resource Stability: Keeping the current designation aims to prevent financial and economic losses to the surrounding area and avoid putting significant strain on local infrastructure and resources (Whereas clause [5]).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Loss of Recreational Freedom: If the area is redesignated as a national park and preserve, it could limit or prohibit access to certain recreational activities currently enjoyed by visitors and residents (Whereas clause [5][1]).
-
Reduced Local Control: A redesignation could lead to more centralized Federal management, which would reduce the cooperative relationship currently held with surrounding municipalities and gateway communities (Whereas clause [5][2]).
-
Infrastructure and Economic Strain: Changing the designation could cause significant strain on local infrastructure and resources, leading to economic losses in the surrounding area (Whereas clause [5][3]).
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.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests? — The bill preserves a management model that emphasizes cooperation with local municipalities to prevent resource strain. Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — The bill maintains the current management structure to protect the area's existing ecological and recreational balance.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — The resolution aims to prevent economic loss and infrastructure strain on surrounding local communities.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The resolution opposes centralized federal management in favor of local community cooperation.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — The resolution seeks to prevent the expenditure of funds required for a change in designation.
- 7/21/2026
- Submitted in House
- Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
Josh GottheimerDemocrat · New Jersey