PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 3, 2025
Increasing Public Access to Recreation Act
This bill increases the amount made available from the Land and Water Conservation Fund for recreational public access projects on federal land.
People & committees
Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5] · R–AZ
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: Jul 30, 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.105 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.105 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.105 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.105 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 · 2025-01-03 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 proposes increasing a percentage and a dollar amount in an existing federal law concerning recreational public access. The supplied text does not reproduce that law, so it does not establish how these changes would affect access or who would receive funding.
2. Increase for recreational public access Subsection (c) of section 200306 of title 54, United States Code, is amended— (1) by striking 3 percent and inserting 10 percent; and (2) by striking $15,000,000 and inserting $50,000,000.
The proposal is titled the Increasing Public Access to Recreation Act. It would replace “3 percent” with “10 percent” and “$15,000,000” with “$50,000,000” in subsection (c) of 54 U.S.C. 200306.
1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Increasing Public Access to Recreation Act.
Subsection (c) of section 200306 of title 54, United States Code, is amended— (1) by striking 3 percent and inserting 10 percent; and (2) by striking $15,000,000 and inserting $50,000,000.
The supplied actions snapshot, updated July 30, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Natural Resources on January 3, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2026-07-30T16:27:18Z. 2025-01-03: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources. 2025-01-03: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-01-03. 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 was identified in the complete supplied introduced version. This conclusion does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
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 a particular recipient or place was identified in the complete supplied introduced version. The missing underlying statute and accompanying disclosure or committee materials limit conclusions beyond this text.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow exemption, carve-out, or preferential treatment was identified in the complete supplied introduced version. This conclusion does not establish absence in the underlying statute, other versions, or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Jul 30, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI