Sponsors (19)
Introduced April 10, 2025 by Al Green · Last progress April 10, 2025
The bill advances removal of offensive federal place names and strengthens tribal and public roles with clearer standards and deadlines, but it creates measurable administrative and local economic burdens, risks local controversy, and may pressure or complicate thorough review and consultation.
Indigenous and tribal communities gain a formal, recognized role to propose and influence renaming of offensive place names, increasing cultural recognition and representation.
Federal naming authorities adopt clearer definitions and consistent standards for identifying 'offensive place names,' creating a more transparent, predictable review process.
Offensive names on federal lands and maps (parks, forests, refuges, wilderness areas) will be systematically reviewed and can be removed, reducing public disparagement of targeted groups.
Local governments, businesses, homeowners, and taxpayers will face direct costs and logistical burdens updating signs, maps, legal documents, promotional materials, and other records after name changes.
Federal agencies (e.g., Department of the Interior, Board on Geographic Names) will incur administrative workload and staffing costs to run reviews, committees, and implementation processes.
Name-change proposals are likely to spark local controversy and political pushback from residents who view renaming as erasing history or as a contested political act.
Based on analysis of 5 sections of legislative text.
Creates a federal advisory committee to recommend replacing offensive geographic and federal land unit names and requires the Board to decide on those proposals within set timelines.
Creates a federal advisory process to find and replace U.S. geographic names and federal land unit names that are derogatory, honor perpetrators of atrocities, or otherwise disparage racial, ethnic, or gender groups. The Secretary of the Interior must form a 17‑member Advisory Committee within 180 days to solicit proposals, consult with Tribes, and recommend new names; the Board on Geographic Names must decide on committee-submitted proposals within three years of receipt and implement accepted changes. The law defines which names are “offensive,” sets membership rules and public-comment requirements for the committee, requires tribal consultation before certain appointments, directs agency support and staff, applies the Federal Advisory Committee Act, and sets a practical five-year working aim with a formal termination point after proposals are acted on by the Board.