House Bill 303, the "Original 33 Memorial Act," directs that a monument be placed on the grounds of the Georgia State Capitol, or another prominent location, to honor the Original 33. The bill identifies the Original 33 as the 33 African American men elected to the Georgia General Assembly in 1868, including three senators and 30 representatives, who were among the first Black state legislators in the United States. The measure is framed as a memorial and recognition bill, acknowledging their pioneering service and the expulsion they suffered during Reconstruction.
The bill amends Chapter 3 of Title 50 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, which covers state symbols and related matters, by adding a new article titled the "Original 33 Memorial Act." It authorizes the monument only subject to the availability of private funds and requires that it be placed as soon as practicable unless public safety concerns justify delay. The legislation does not create a new regulatory program or alter substantive rights; instead, it establishes a state-recognized commemorative project and directs the placement of a historical monument on state property or another prominent site.
Impact
HB303 changes Georgia law by adding a new statutory article in Title 50 governing state symbols and memorials. Its practical effect is to authorize and direct the placement of a monument honoring the Original 33, contingent on private funding, and to require state action to carry out the memorial project when feasible. The bill primarily affects state government, the Capitol grounds, and the process for commemorative monuments, rather than private parties or regulated industries.
Sentiment
The overall sentiment around HB303 appears strongly positive and noncontroversial. It passed the House unanimously 167-0 and the Senate unanimously 52-0, indicating broad bipartisan support. The bill’s purpose—honoring pioneering Black legislators and recognizing their historical significance—appears to have been well received across both chambers.
Contention
There is little evidence of substantive opposition or debate in the available record. The only notable limiting feature is that the monument is contingent on private funding, which may reflect a practical concern about public expenditure rather than a point of ideological conflict. The bill also allows postponement for public safety concerns, but no specific controversy or disagreement is reflected in the votes or transcripts provided.