Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

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

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

Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making
Mount Rushmore
Photo by John Bakator on Unsplash

Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making

No one can denounce the New York Yankee fan for boasting that her favorite ballclub has won more World Series championships than any other. At 27 titles, the Bronx Bombers claim more than twice their closest competitor.

No one can question admirers of the late, great Chick Corea, or the equally astonishing Alison Krauss, for their virtually unrivaled Grammy victories. At 27 gold statues, only Beyoncé and Quincy Jones have more in the popular categories.

Keep ReadingShow less
A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

Trump’s mass deportations promise security but deliver economic pain, family separation, and chaos. Here’s why this policy is failing America.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

The Cruel Arithmetic of Trump’s Immigration Crackdown

As summer 2025 winds down, the Trump administration’s deportation machine is operating at full throttle—removing over one million people in six months and fulfilling a campaign promise to launch the “largest deportation operation in American history.” For supporters, this is a victory lap for law and order. For the rest of the lot, it’s a costly illusion—one that trades complexity for spectacle and security for chaos.

Let’s dispense with the fantasy first. The administration insists that mass deportations will save billions, reduce crime, and protect American jobs. But like most political magic tricks, the numbers vanish under scrutiny. The Economic Policy Institute warns that this policy could destroy millions of jobs—not just for immigrants but for U.S.-born workers in sectors like construction, elder care, and child care. That’s not just a fiscal cliff—it is fewer teachers, fewer caregivers, and fewer homes built. It is inflation with a human face. In fact, child care alone could shrink by over 15%, leaving working parents stranded and employers scrambling.

Meanwhile, the Peterson Institute projects a drop in GDP and employment, while the Penn Wharton School’s Budget Model estimates that deporting unauthorized workers over a decade would slash Social Security revenue and inflate deficits by nearly $900 billion. That’s not a typo. It’s a fiscal cliff dressed up as border security.

And then there’s food. Deporting farmworkers doesn’t just leave fields fallow—it drives up prices. Analysts predict a 10% spike in food costs, compounding inflation and squeezing families already living paycheck to paycheck. In California, where immigrant renters are disproportionately affected, eviction rates are climbing. The Urban Institute warns that deportations are deepening the housing crisis by gutting the construction workforce. So much for protecting American livelihoods.

But the real cost isn’t measured in dollars. It’s measured in broken families, empty classrooms, and quiet despair. The administration has deployed 10,000 armed service members to the border and ramped up “self-deportation” tactics—policies so harsh they force people to leave voluntarily. The result: Children skipping meals because their parents fear applying for food assistance; Cancer patients deported mid-treatment; and LGBTQ+ youth losing access to mental health care. The Human Rights Watch calls it a “crueler world for immigrants.” That’s putting it mildly.

This isn’t targeted enforcement. It’s a dragnet. Green card holders, long-term residents, and asylum seekers are swept up alongside undocumented workers. Viral videos show ICE raids at schools, hospitals, and churches. Lawsuits are piling up. And the chilling effect is real: immigrant communities are retreating from public life, afraid to report crimes or seek help. That’s not safety. That’s silence. Legal scholars warn that the administration’s tactics—raids at schools, churches, and hospitals—may violate Fourth Amendment protections and due process norms.

Even the administration’s security claims are shaky. Yes, border crossings are down—by about 60%, thanks to policies like “Remain in Mexico.” But deportation numbers haven’t met the promised scale. The Migration Policy Institute notes that monthly averages hover around 14,500, far below the millions touted. And the root causes of undocumented immigration—like visa overstays, which account for 60% of cases—remain untouched.

Crime reduction? Also murky. FBI data shows declines in some areas, but experts attribute this more to economic trends than immigration enforcement. In fact, fear in immigrant communities may be making things worse. When people won’t talk to the police, crimes go unreported. That’s not justice. That’s dysfunction.

Public opinion is catching up. In February, 59% of Americans supported mass deportations. By July, that number had cratered. Gallup reports a 25-point drop in favor of immigration cuts. The Pew Research Center finds that 75% of Democrats—and a growing number of independents—think the policy goes too far. Even Trump-friendly voices like Joe Rogan are balking, calling raids on “construction workers and gardeners” a betrayal of common sense.

On social media, the backlash is swift. Users on X (formerly Twitter) call the policy “ineffective,” “manipulative,” and “theater.” And they’re not wrong. This isn’t about solving immigration. It’s about staging a show—one where fear plays the villain and facts are the understudy.

The White House insists this is what voters wanted. But a narrow electoral win isn’t a blank check for policies that harm the economy and fray the social fabric. Alternatives exist: Targeted enforcement focused on violent offenders; visa reform to address overstays; and legal pathways to fill labor gaps. These aren’t radical ideas—they’re pragmatic ones. And they don’t require tearing families apart to work.

Trump’s deportation blitz is a mirage. It promises safety but delivers instability. It claims to protect jobs but undermines the very sectors that keep the country running. It speaks the language of law and order but acts with the recklessness of a demolition crew. Alternatives exist—and they work. Cities that focus on community policing and legal pathways report higher public safety and stronger economies. Reform doesn’t require cruelty. It requires courage.

Keep ReadingShow less
Just the Facts: Impact of the Big Beautiful Bill on Health Care

U.S. President Donald Trump takes the stage during a reception for Republican members of the House of Representatives in the East Room of the White House on July 22, 2025 in Washington, DC. Trump thanked GOP lawmakers for passing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Getty Images, Chip Somodevilla

Just the Facts: Impact of the Big Beautiful Bill on Health Care

The Fulcrum strives to approach news stories with an open mind and skepticism, striving to present our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best we can, we remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces. However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.

What are the new Medicaid work requirements, and are they more lenient or more restrictive than what previously existed?

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. Constitution
Imagining constitutions
Douglas Sacha/Getty Images

A Bold Civic Renaissance for America’s 250th

Every September 17, Americans mark Constitution Day—the anniversary of the signing of our nation’s foundational charter in 1787. The day is often commemorated with classroom lessons and speaking events, but it is more than a ceremonial anniversary. It is an invitation to ask: What does it mean to live under a constitution that was designed as a charge for each generation to study, debate, and uphold its principles? This year, as we look toward the semiquincentennial of our nation in 2026, the question feels especially urgent.

The decade between 1776 and 1787 was defined by a period of bold and intentional nation and national identity building. In that time, the United States declared independence, crafted its first national government, won a war to make their independence a reality, threw out the first government when it failed, and forged a new federal government to lead the nation. We stand at a similar inflection point. The coming decade, from the nation’s semiquincentennial in 2026 to the Constitution’s in 2037, offers a parallel opportunity to reimagine and reinvigorate our American civic culture. Amid the challenges we face today, there’s an opportunity to study, reflect, and prepare to write the next chapters in our American story—it is as much about the past 250 years, as it is about the next 250 years. It will require the same kind of audacious commitment to building for the future that was present at the nation’s outset.

Keep ReadingShow less