PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Subcommittee Hearings Held
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Murphy, Gregory F. [R-NC-3] · R–NC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Subcommittee Hearings Held
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries.
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: May 21, 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.1885 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.1885 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.1885 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.1885 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 · 2025-03-05 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 proposal would remove certain land in North Topsail Beach, North Carolina, from a mapped unit of the John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System. It covers parcels within the town that local zoning designates for purposes other than conservation when the bill becomes law. The Secretary of the Interior would have to change the map within 30 days of enactment.
Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall make such corrections to the map described in subsection (d) as are necessary to exclude from unit L06 of the John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System each parcel in the town of North Topsail Beach, North Carolina, that is designated by local zoning ordinance for purposes other than conservation as of the date of enactment of this Act.
Eligibility for removal would depend on the town's zoning regulations in effect on the enactment date. The proposal expressly limits its application to portions of unit L06 within North Topsail Beach's municipal boundaries.
This Act applies only to areas of unit L06 that are within the municipality of the town of North Topsail Beach.
In this section, the term local zoning ordinance means zoning regulations in effect for the town of North Topsail Beach, North Carolina, as of the date of enactment of this Act.
each parcel in the town of North Topsail Beach, North Carolina, that is designated by local zoning ordinance for purposes other than conservation as of the date of enactment of this Act.
The Secretary would have to treat each qualifying parcel as meeting the criteria in section 4(g)(1)(B) of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act. The supplied bill does not reproduce those criteria.
The Secretary shall consider each parcel described in subsection (a) to meet the criteria described in subparagraph (B) of section 4(g)(1) of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3503(g)(1)).
The required changes would apply to the map for unit L06 in the Coastal Barrier Resources System map set dated November 25, 2024.
The map referred to in subsection (a) is a map that— (1) is included in a set of maps as part of the John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System entitled John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System and dated November 25, 2024; and (2) relates to unit L06 of the John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System.
The supplied actions snapshot, updated May 21, 2025, records introduction and referral to the House Committee on Natural Resources on March 5, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2025-05-21T08:06:21Z.
2025-03-05: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources. 2025-03-05: Introduced in House
The supplied May 21, 2025 snapshot also records referral to the Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries on May 13 and subcommittee hearings on May 20, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2025-05-21T08:06:21Z. 2025-05-20: Subcommittee Hearings Held 2025-05-13: Referred to the Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries.
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-03-05. 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 and 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 particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version; formal earmark status cannot be established for other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
The supplied introduced text contains a geographically narrow exception central to its main policy. This classification does not establish a financial benefit or improper purpose.
Qualifying parcels in North Topsail Beach would receive special treatment: mandatory exclusion from unit L06 and mandatory recognition as meeting specified statutory criteria. The exception is limited to land within the town zoned for purposes other than conservation on the enactment date.
Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall make such corrections to the map described in subsection (d) as are necessary to exclude from unit L06 of the John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System each parcel in the town of North Topsail Beach, North Carolina, that is designated by local zoning ordinance for purposes other than conservation as of the date of enactment of this Act.
The Secretary shall consider each parcel described in subsection (a) to meet the criteria described in subparagraph (B) of section 4(g)(1) of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3503(g)(1)).
This Act applies only to areas of unit L06 that are within the municipality of the town of North Topsail Beach.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: May 21, 2025. How PlainBill uses AI