PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H607)
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Kaptur, Marcy [D-OH-9] · D–OH
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H607)
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E102)
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: Sep 29, 2025. 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.1073 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.1073 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.1073 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.1073 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 · 2025-02-06 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 create a network of sites and water routes to help people learn about and visit the Great Lakes while supporting conservation and restoration. The Interior Department, working with the Environmental Protection Agency, would help connect these resources and establish grants for governments, communities, nonprofits, and the private sector. These are proposed changes in the supplied introduced text.
The Secretary of the Interior (referred to in this section as the Secretary), in cooperation with the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (referred to in this section as the Administrator), shall provide technical and financial assistance
(B) identify and use the collective resources as Great Lakes Gateways sites for enhancing public education regarding and access to the Great Lakes; (C) link the Great Lakes Gateways sites with trails, tour roads, scenic byways, and other connections as determined by the Secretary; (D) develop and establish Great Lakes Watertrails comprising water routes and connections to Great Lakes Gateways sites and other land resources within the Great Lakes Watershed; and (E) create a Great Lakes Gateways Network comprised of Great Lakes Gateways sites and Great Lakes Watertrails.
The Secretary, in cooperation with the Administrator, shall establish a Great Lakes Gateways Grants Assistance Program to aid State and local governments, local communities, nonprofit organizations, and the private sector in conserving, restoring, and interpreting important historic, cultural, recreational, and natural resources within the Great Lakes Watershed.
Section 1 would name the legislation the Great Lakes Gateways Network Act of 2025.
1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Great Lakes Gateways Network Act of 2025.
The Interior Secretary, cooperating with the Environmental Protection Agency administrator and other public and private partners, would have to provide technical and financial help to identify, conserve, restore, and explain the significance of resources in the Great Lakes watershed—the region that drains into the lakes. The network would connect sites through trails, roads, scenic routes, and water routes.
The Secretary of the Interior (referred to in this section as the Secretary), in cooperation with the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (referred to in this section as the Administrator), shall provide technical and financial assistance, in cooperation with other Federal agencies, State and local governments, nonprofit organizations, and the private sector to— (A) identify, conserve, restore, and interpret natural, recreational, historical, and cultural resources within the Great Lakes Watershed;
(C) link the Great Lakes Gateways sites with trails, tour roads, scenic byways, and other connections as determined by the Secretary; (D) develop and establish Great Lakes Watertrails comprising water routes and connections to Great Lakes Gateways sites and other land resources within the Great Lakes Watershed; and (E) create a Great Lakes Gateways Network comprised of Great Lakes Gateways sites and Great Lakes Watertrails.
The network could include state or federal parks and refuges, historic seaports, archaeological sites, cultural and historical sites, and recreation sites. The Interior Secretary could also select other sites offering public access and information about resources.
(2) Components Components of the Great Lakes Gateways Network may include— (A) State or Federal parks or refuges; (B) historic seaports; (C) archaeological, cultural, historical, or recreational sites; or (D) other public access and interpretive sites as selected by the Secretary.
The Interior Secretary and Environmental Protection Agency administrator would establish a grant program supporting conservation, restoration, and explanation of important resources within the Great Lakes watershed. Eligible categories of beneficiaries would include state and local governments, local communities, nonprofit organizations, and the private sector. The two officials would develop rules for eligibility, priority, and review of grants.
(b) Great Lakes Gateways Grants Assistance Program (1) In general The Secretary, in cooperation with the Administrator, shall establish a Great Lakes Gateways Grants Assistance Program to aid State and local governments, local communities, nonprofit organizations, and the private sector in conserving, restoring, and interpreting important historic, cultural, recreational, and natural resources within the Great Lakes Watershed. (2) Criteria The Secretary, in cooperation with the Administrator, shall develop appropriate eligibility, prioritization, and review criteria for grants under this section.
Each grant could cover no more than half of eligible project costs. Nonfederal sources would have to cover the remainder, and donated services or materials could count toward that contribution. Administrative expenses could not exceed 10 percent of all eligible project costs.
(3) Matching funds and administrative expenses A grant under this section— (A) shall not exceed 50 percent of eligible project costs; (B) shall be made on the condition that non-Federal sources, including in-kind contributions of services or materials, provide the remainder of eligible project costs; and (C) shall be made on the condition that administrative expenses are not more than 10 percent of all eligible project costs.
The bill would authorize Congress to provide $6 million for each fiscal year from 2026 through 2031 to carry out Section 2. This is permission for funding through appropriations, not an appropriation that itself supplies the money.
(c) Authorization of appropriations There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section $6,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2026 through 2031.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated September 29, 2025, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Natural Resources on February 6, 2025. It also records sponsor introductory remarks on February 6 and February 10, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2025-09-29T14:12:26Z. 2025-02-10: Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H607) 2025-02-06: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources. 2025-02-06: Introduced in House 2025-02-06: Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E102)
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-06. 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 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 project was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. A regional program authorization alone does not establish an earmark. This conclusion is limited to this version and does not resolve formal earmark status in accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow carve-out, special exemption, or preferential exception was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. The program's intended geographic coverage and broad beneficiary categories do not alone warrant a finding. This conclusion does not extend to other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 29, 2025. How PlainBill uses AI