Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Congress Bill Spotlight: renaming Gulf of Mexico as “Gulf of America”

News

Congress Bill Spotlight: renaming Gulf of Mexico as “Gulf of America”

A closeup of the Gulf of Mexico on a map.

Canva Images

The Fulcrum introduces Congress Bill Spotlight, a weekly report by Jesse Rifkin, focusing on the noteworthy legislation of the thousands introduced in Congress. Rifkin has written about Congress for years, and now he's dissecting the most interesting bills you need to know about, but that often don't get the right news coverage.

The potential rebrand echoes the 2003-era rebranding of French fries as “freedom fries.”


The Bill

A new bill would officially rename the Gulf of Mexico as the “Gulf of America.”

At least in the United States, that is. Mexico itself, not being subject to U.S. laws, could continue to call the Gulf whatever it wants. So could every other country in the world—not to mention international mapmaking and cartography organizations.

Indeed, even in the U.S., many people would likely continue to call it the Gulf of Mexico just out of habit, perhaps for years to come. The bill would only change the name in official documents, which are specified to include any “law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United States.”

The House bill was introduced on January 9 by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA14). The bill does not appear to have a title.

Context

The body of water off the U.S. southeast coast borders five states to its north —Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas—plus Mexico to its west and Cuba to its southeast.

The name “Gulf of Mexico” was first used on a map in 1550. Even a few alternate names used long ago never included “Gulf of America”; instead, other names that never quite caught on included the “Gulf of Florida” and “Gulf of Cortés.”

Indeed, a Mississippi Democratic state representative’s 2012 proposal to rename it the “Gulf of America” was satirical, meant to spoof Republicans’ displays of hyperpatriotism.

Yet, President Donald Trump floated the idea with complete seriousness at a January press conference as president-elect. On his first day in office, Trump signed an executive order changing two geographical names: the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, plus Alaska’s Mount Denali to Mount McKinley.

While the executive order encouraged the changes to be implemented within 30 days, Florida’s own state government under Gov. Ron DeSantis did so within hours.

But even Trump’s executive order acknowledged that the decree was only “guidance” because “congressional action is required to establish a renaming in public law.” Hence, this bill.

What Supporters Say

Supporters argue that it’s only fair that a country should name its bordering body of water after itself, at least for domestic purposes.

“The American people are footing the bill to protect and secure the maritime waterways for commerce to be conducted. Our U.S. armed forces protect the area from any military threats from foreign countries,” Rep. Greene said in a press release. (That claim is true: the Coast Guard patrols the area.) “It’s our Gulf. The rightful name is the Gulf of America.”

What Opponents Say

Trump’s simultaneous name change from Mount Denali to Mount McKinley is controversial for removing the original Native Alaskan moniker, to one instead honoring a white president who never even visited Alaska.

By contrast, the “Gulf” name change isn’t so controversial on its actual merits. Rather, opponents say it’s a waste of time and a cheap trick to score political points with Trump’s base.

“House Democrats believe that we are not sent to Washington to… rename the Gulf of Mexico,” House Democratic Leader Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY8) said at a press conference. “We were sent to Washington to lower the high cost of living in the United States of America.”

Mexico’s own political leader dismissed the issue as irrelevant in her own country.

“He says that he will call it the Gulf of America,” Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum said. “For us and for the entire world it will continue to be called the Gulf of Mexico.” She also sarcastically suggested renaming the entire U.S. as “Mexican America” in response.

Odds of Passage

The bill has attracted 29 cosponsors, all Republicans. It now awaits a potential vote in the House Foreign Affairs Committee, controlled by Republicans.

No Senate companion version appears to have been introduced yet.

SUGGESTION: Congress Bill Spotlight: constitutional amendment letting Trump be elected to a third term

President-Elect Donald Trump speaks during a victory rally at the Capital One Arena on January 19, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Kevin Carter/Getty Images)

Jesse Rifkin is a freelance journalist with the Fulcrum. Don’t miss his weekly report, Congress Bill Spotlight, every Friday on the Fulcrum. Rifkin’s writings about politics and Congress have been published in the Washington Post, Politico, Roll Call, Los Angeles Times, CNN Opinion, GovTrack, and USA Today.

Read More

Guarding What? The Moral Cost of Militarizing Our Cities

Protestors in Chicago, August 2025

Credit: Angeles Ponpa

Guarding What? The Moral Cost of Militarizing Our Cities

A federal judge recently blocked plans to deploy the National Guard to Chicago. But the battle over militarizing American streets is far from over. On Monday, a federal appeals court lifted a temporary restraining order and ruled that the National Guard can be deployed to Portland, Oregon, amid ongoing protests at the Macadam ICE Facility.

Every time political leaders propose sending troops into cities or float invoking the Insurrection Act, they test a fragile boundary that keeps democracy in check.

Keep ReadingShow less
Joe Manchin on Taxpayer-Funded Primaries: 'They're Locking Us Out!'

Joe Manchin

Alex Wong/Getty Images

Joe Manchin on Taxpayer-Funded Primaries: 'They're Locking Us Out!'

While appearing on CNN host Michael Smerconish’s show, former Democratic U.S. Senator Joe Manchin, now a registered independent, told Smerconish that “we have to have open primaries” in order to get candidates who prioritize representation to run and have a chance to win.

“We have to change the primary,” he added. “They are locking us out.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Ingrassia Exit Highlights Rare GOP Pushback to Trump’s Personnel Picks

President Donald Trump speaks at a White House press briefing on Jan. 30, 2025.

Credit: Jonah Elkowitz/Medill News Service

Ingrassia Exit Highlights Rare GOP Pushback to Trump’s Personnel Picks

WASHINGTON — Paul Ingrassia withdrew his nomination to lead the Office of Special Counsel on Tuesday night after facing Republican pushback over past controversial statements.

While Ingrassia joins a growing list of President Donald Trump’s nominees who have withdrawn from consideration, many who have aired controversial beliefs or lack requisite qualifications have still been appointed or are still in the nomination process.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Revolution in Congressional Decision-Making
low light photography of armchairs in front of desk

A Revolution in Congressional Decision-Making

The dysfunction of today’s federal government is not simply the product of political division or individual leaders; it is rooted in the internal rules of Congress itself. The Founders, in one of their few major oversights, granted Congress the authority to make its own procedural rules (Article I, Section 5) without establishing any framework for how it should operate. Over time, this blank check has produced a legislative process built to serve partisan power, not public representation.

The result is a Congress that often rewards obstruction and gridlock over compromise and action. The Founders imagined representatives closely tied to their constituents—one member for every 30,000 to 50,000 citizens. Today, that ratio has ballooned to one for every 765,000 in the House, and in the Senate, each member can represent tens of millions (e.g., California). As the population has grown, representation has become distant and impersonal, while procedural rules have tightened the grip of party leadership. Major issues can no longer reach the floor unless the majority party permits it. The link between citizens and decisions has nearly vanished.

Keep ReadingShow less