To clarify the United States interest in certain submerged lands in the area of the Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge, and for other purposes.

Referred to the Subcommittee on Water, Oceans, and Wildlife.

Congressional Research Service

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 3, 2019

This bill states that Congress finds that the United States did not acquire any right, title, or interest in or to submerged lands in Nantucket Sound (near the coast of Massachusetts) or the waters above those submerged lands as a result of the taking described in the civil action, United States v. 3,000 Acres of Land (D. Mass. 1944). That taking involved land that is now part of the Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge.

Read the summary on Congress.gov

PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

People & committees

Who introduced it

Rep. Keating, William R. [D-MA-9] · D–MA

Committees

Natural Resources Committee

0 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Legislative record

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

Feb 5, 2019
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water, Oceans, and Wildlife.
Jan 3, 2019
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Jan 3, 2019
Introduced in House
Jan 3, 2019
Introduced in House

Primary sources

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Introduced in House · Jan 3, 2019 Formatted Text PDF Formatted XML

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

HR 1157 · To clarify the United States interest in certain submerged lands in the area of the Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge, and for other purposes.

Source last updated: Jan 3, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

AI Conversation Starters

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.R.183 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.R.183, 116th Congress: To clarify the United States interest in certain submerged lands in the area of the Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge, and for other purposes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/183

Text version to examine: Introduced in House · 2019-01-03.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/hr183/BILLS-116hr183ih.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-01-03T01:22:06Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Analyze H.R.183 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.

Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.R.183 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.R.183, 116th Congress: To clarify the United States interest in certain submerged lands in the area of the Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge, and for other purposes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/183

Text version to examine: Introduced in House · 2019-01-03.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/hr183/BILLS-116hr183ih.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-01-03T01:22:06Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.R.183 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.

Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.R.183 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.R.183, 116th Congress: To clarify the United States interest in certain submerged lands in the area of the Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge, and for other purposes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/183

Text version to examine: Introduced in House · 2019-01-03.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/hr183/BILLS-116hr183ih.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-01-03T01:22:06Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.R.183 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.

Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.R.183 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.R.183, 116th Congress: To clarify the United States interest in certain submerged lands in the area of the Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge, and for other purposes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/183

Text version to examine: Introduced in House · 2019-01-03.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/hr183/BILLS-116hr183ih.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-01-03T01:22:06Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.R.183 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.