House Natural Resources Committee advances reauthorization of Great American Outdoors Act, rejects bid to strip foreign visitor surcharge

The House Committee on Natural Resources voted to report HR 92 50, a five-year reauthorization of the Great American Outdoors Act (GAOA) Legacy Restoration Fund, to the full House by voice vote after rejecting an amendment to remove a proposed surcharge on foreign visitors.

The markup advanced an amendment in the nature of a substitute (ANS) that the chair said reflects bipartisan, bicameral negotiations and adds transparency, streamlines certain environmental reviews, and prioritizes visitor-facing recreation projects across the National Park Service, Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife Service and Bureau of Land Management. "This ANS represents the results of careful bipartisan and bicameral negotiations," Chairman Westerman said in opening remarks.

Why it matters: supporters said reauthorizing the Legacy Restoration Fund will provide predictable resources to tackle a long-running deferred maintenance backlog and improve visitor access. Ranking Member Huffman said the original fund had "invested nearly $6,000,000,000 in 400 projects across all 50 states and 5 US territories" and praised provisions that increase transparency and project-selection criteria. Chair Westerman cited broader economic impacts, telling the committee the legislation would support about 72,000 jobs and roughly $26,400,000,000 in economic activity for gateway and tribal communities.

Debate over the foreign visitor surcharge was the session’s central point of friction. Rep. Magaziner offered an amendment to strike the surcharge, arguing it was "an unnecessary and arbitrary fee on international visitors" and that the administration’s prior pilot charged "$100 per person" for entry, which he said could amount to "$400 for a family of 4." He warned that higher fees could depress tourism and harm gateway economies.

Supporters of keeping tailored fee authority emphasized guardrails added in the ANS. Ranking Member Huffman said the revised language limits the surcharge to visitors on tourist visas (excluding permanent residents), allows the Department of the Interior to tailor or suspend fees for individual sites, and requires stakeholder engagement and self-attestation to avoid ID checks. "I absolutely will not support doing anything to turn our parks into immigration enforcement zones," Huffman said, urging defeat of the amendment while backing the ANS.

Rep. McClintock, supporting Magaziner’s change, argued from an economic perspective: "When you tax something, you get less of it." Rep. Dexter said she supported much of the underlying bill but opposed the fee provision on civil liberties grounds, saying she worried it "gives the administration yet another window into people's citizenship status" and could lead to racial profiling. The committee conducted a voice vote on the Magaziner amendment; "in the opinion of the chair, the no's have it," and the amendment failed.

After defeating the amendment, the committee adopted the ANS by voice vote. The committee then ordered HR 92 50 reported to the House with the recommendation that the bill be favorably approved. Without objection, the motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Procedural note and next steps: Ranking Member Huffman gave notice of his intention to file supplemental or minority views under House rule 11 clause 2(l). Committee staff were authorized to make technical and conforming changes to adopted documents subject to minority approval; the committee then adjourned.

What the ANS adds and what remains open: committee members praised new transparency and reporting requirements, a publicly searchable deferred-maintenance database, and provisions to streamline National Historic Preservation Act and National Environmental Policy Act consultations. Members also raised implementation concerns — including the need for additional annual appropriations beyond this reauthorization and ensuring agency staffing to execute projects — which Huffman and other members said will require continued congressional oversight.

The bill and its amendment history will now move to the House floor process; members on both sides signaled a desire for further engagement with stakeholders in gateway communities and with land-management agencies as the measure advances.