PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Dingell, Debbie [D-MI-6] · D–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Oct 14, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.10186 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.10186 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.10186 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.10186 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2026-08-31 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
This bill would prevent the President and specified federal officials from changing the official names of the five Great Lakes. It would also cancel the effect of an executive order that the bill describes as renaming Lake Ontario “Lake America,” and prohibit federal actions and funding to carry out that order or substantially similar actions.
the President, the Secretary of the Interior, and any officer or employee of the Federal Government acting under the authority of the President may not alter, change, redesignating, or otherwise rename the official geographic name of any of the following Great Lakes: (1) Lake Superior; (2) Lake Michigan; (3) Lake Huron; (4) Lake Erie; or (5) Lake Ontario.
Executive Order 14422, Honoring the American History of the Great Lakes and Renaming Lake Ontario as Lake America, issued on August 27, 2026, shall have no force or effect.
The President, the Secretary of the Interior, and any officer or employee of the Federal Government shall not issue, implement, administer, or enforce any Executive order, memorandum, proclamation, or other action issued for the purpose of carrying out Executive Order 14422 or any substantially similar Executive order or action.
No Federal funds may be used, obligated, or expended to implement, administer, or otherwise give effect to Executive Order 14422 or any substantially similar Executive order or action.
The naming restriction would apply to Lakes Superior, Michigan, Huron, Erie, and Ontario. It would bind the President, the Secretary of the Interior, and federal officers or employees acting under presidential authority, even if another law otherwise allowed a name change.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the President, the Secretary of the Interior, and any officer or employee of the Federal Government acting under the authority of the President may not alter, change, redesignating, or otherwise rename the official geographic name of any of the following Great Lakes: (1) Lake Superior; (2) Lake Michigan; (3) Lake Huron; (4) Lake Erie; or (5) Lake Ontario.
The bill would make Executive Order 14422 legally ineffective. The bill identifies it as an order issued August 27, 2026, concerning Great Lakes history and renaming Lake Ontario as Lake America.
Executive Order 14422, Honoring the American History of the Great Lakes and Renaming Lake Ontario as Lake America, issued on August 27, 2026, shall have no force or effect.
The President, Interior Secretary, and all federal officers and employees would be prohibited from issuing, implementing, administering, or enforcing directives intended to carry out Executive Order 14422 or a substantially similar executive order or action.
The President, the Secretary of the Interior, and any officer or employee of the Federal Government shall not issue, implement, administer, or enforce any Executive order, memorandum, proclamation, or other action issued for the purpose of carrying out Executive Order 14422 or any substantially similar Executive order or action.
The bill would prohibit using federal money, committing it for payment, or spending it to implement, administer, or otherwise give effect to Executive Order 14422 or a substantially similar executive order or action.
No Federal funds may be used, obligated, or expended to implement, administer, or otherwise give effect to Executive Order 14422 or any substantially similar Executive order or action.
The supplied actions snapshot, updated October 14, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Natural Resources on August 31, 2026.
Source snapshot updated 2026-10-14T08:05:35Z. 2026-08-31: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources. 2026-08-31: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-08-31. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy change attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow preferential benefit, carve-out, or special exemption was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Oct 14, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI