Florida legislature renames Gulf of Mexico to Gulf of America
- The Florida Legislature passed bills to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America in response to a directive from President Trump.
- The decision faced criticism as a symbolic gesture diverting attention from more pressing state issues.
- Local businesses like Gulf of America Outfitters reported significant growth linked to the name change.
In early 2025, the Republican-controlled Florida Legislature approved legislation to change the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. This decision followed a directive from President Donald Trump, who had issued an executive order directing such a name change in January. The legislation included two bills - HB 549 and HB 575 - aimed at amending state laws to reflect this new naming convention, which some lawmakers expressed was more of a political statement rather than a practical necessity. The Senate passed the bills with strong support from Republican lawmakers, resulting in a vote of 28 to 9. While all Republicans voted in favor, some Democrats also supported the measures, citing varying reasons, including patriotism and community representation. Senator Nick DiCeglie, who sponsored one of the bills, emphasized that the renaming was emblematic of American exceptionalism, while others, like Senator Lori Berman, criticized the move as a symbolic gesture lacking tangible benefits. Following the executive order, Florida's Governor Ron DeSantis stated his intention to sign the bills. There was also concern noted among critics who saw it as an unnecessary distraction from critical issues facing the state. They argued that the rebranding of the Gulf was a political maneuver fueled by Trump's directive and did not provide practical advantages to residents or the environment. Amid this political landscape, local business owners like Adam Petersen, who operates a fishing charter business called Gulf of America Outfitters, noted significant growth attributed to the name change, reporting a surge in business by 540% shortly after the announcement. Petersen clarified that his choice of name aimed to honor community ties and environmental connections rather than make a political statement. This change has led to broader conversations about the historical naming of significant geographical landmarks and the implications of altering their names.