H. Res. 1444 (119th)Bill Overview

Expressing support for maintaining the designation of the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area.

Simple Resolutiondomestic policy
Cosponsors
Support
Bipartisan
Introduced
Jul 21, 2026
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Simple ResolutionWhat this resolution actually does

This resolution is a statement by the House of Representatives expressing its view that the Delaware Water Gap should remain a national recreation area and opposing redesignation as a national park and preserve. It does not change any law, create or block funding, or require agencies to act. The language asking that no funds be used is a nonbinding expression of the House's preference and does not itself prevent spending. Its practical effect is to register the House's position and guide or signal lawmakers and the public.

Passage rules

As a simple House resolution, it would be considered and voted on only in the House and would need a majority vote to pass; it does not go to the President and has no force of law. It is a nonbinding expression of the House's views rather than an enactment that changes policy or appropriations.

This House resolution expresses support for keeping the Delaware Water Gap designated as a National Recreation Area and opposes redesignating it as a National Park and Preserve.

It argues redesignation could restrict certain recreational activities, centralize federal management, strain local infrastructure, and harm the local economy.

The resolution calls on Congress to continue supporting national recreation areas, local partnerships, and states that no funds should be used for redesignation.

Passage5/100

House simple resolution is nonbinding and does not create law; adoption does not produce statutory change, so near-zero chance of becoming law.

CredibilityAligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this resolution is a clear, narrowly scoped expression of the House's preference to retain the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area designation. It articulates the issue and potential consequences of redesignation, but it intentionally provides minimal operational detail, enforcement mechanisms, fiscal analysis, or accountability structures because it is nonbinding.

Contention38/100

Progressive worries redesignation could enhance conservation funding

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Local governmentsFederal agencies

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Local governmentsPreserves local access to a wide range of recreational activities residents currently enjoy.
  • Local governmentsMaintains cooperative local-Federal management arrangements with surrounding municipalities.
  • Potential benefitAvoids potential restrictions on hunting, fishing, and other traditional uses.
Likely burdened
  • Potential burdenBlocks a redesignation that could provide stronger conservation protections for sensitive species.
  • Federal agenciesMay forgo increased federal investment, visitor services, and related job growth.
  • Potential burdenPrecludes a policy option that could harmonize management with other national park units.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Progressive worries redesignation could enhance conservation funding
Progressive70%

Generally supportive of protecting public access, local relationships, and recreation opportunities at the Gap.

However, some on the left might worry the resolution forecloses consideration of stronger conservation tools that a national park/preserve could bring.

Claims about economic harms and access restrictions are treated as plausible but somewhat speculative without further study.

Leans supportive
Centrist75%

Likely to view the resolution as a reasonable defense of local access and established cooperative management while wanting more evidence.

Would prefer a deliberative process, community consultations, and cost assessments before any redesignation.

Sees the resolution as non-binding political guidance but appreciates protecting existing uses.

Leans supportive
Conservative95%

Strongly favorable: favors local control, continued recreational access, and limiting federal centralization.

Views the explicit opposition to redesignation and prohibition on funds as protections against federal overreach and potential restrictions on traditional uses.

Sees the resolution as aligned with limited-government principles.

Leans supportive
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood5/100

House simple resolution is nonbinding and does not create law; adoption does not produce statutory change, so near-zero chance of becoming law.

Scope and complexity
24%
Scopenarrow
24%
Complexitylow
Why this could stall
  • Whether House leadership will schedule consideration
  • Local political pressure in New Jersey and Pennsylvania
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Progressive worries redesignation could enhance conservation funding

House simple resolution is nonbinding and does not create law; adoption does not produce statutory change, so near-zero chance of becoming…

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this resolution is a clear, narrowly scoped expression of the House's preference to retain the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area designation. It articulates the issue…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis