Relating to the terminology used in statute, resolutions, rules, and other state publications to refer to the partially landlocked body of water on the southeastern periphery of the North American continent.
SB 1717 would direct Texas state government to replace references to the “Gulf of Mexico” with “Gulf of America” in new statutes, resolutions, rules, agency publications, and, when existing provisions are amended, in the affected statutory language. It creates a new Government Code chapter establishing this terminology preference and requires the Texas Legislative Council, state agencies, and the commission that reviews agencies to consider and recommend the revisions needed to implement the new wording.
Beyond the terminology change, the bill amends a very large number of provisions across the Agriculture, Alcoholic Beverage, Civil Practice and Remedies, Education, Family, Government, Health and Safety, Local Government, Natural Resources, Occupations, Property, Parks and Wildlife, Special District Local Laws, Transportation, Tax, Utilities, and Water Codes. Most of those changes are conforming edits that substitute “Gulf of America” for “Gulf of Mexico” in geographic definitions, jurisdictional triggers, coastal management provisions, beach access rules, port and navigation laws, water and environmental statutes, and tax or municipal authority provisions tied to Gulf-adjacent locations.
The bill’s practical legal impact is broad but largely textual: it would alter the terminology used throughout Texas law and state publications, while leaving most underlying programs, powers, and eligibility rules intact. Because many statutes use Gulf-bordering geography to define applicability, the bill would also affect how those provisions are codified and referenced going forward, including coastal counties, municipalities, ports, beach management, shoreline protection, marine resources, and offshore-related tax and regulatory provisions.
The general sentiment reflected in the voting history appears supportive but not unanimous. The bill advanced on the Senate floor with 20–11 votes on second-reading and 21–10 on third-reading, indicating a clear majority in favor but meaningful opposition. No committee transcript was provided, so the available record shows floor-level support without detailed public discussion in the supplied materials.
The main point of contention appears to be the bill’s core policy choice to rename the Gulf in Texas law, which is symbolically significant and politically charged even though much of the bill is conforming language. Opponents likely objected to the terminology change itself and to the breadth of the bill’s statewide statutory revisions, while supporters likely viewed it as a straightforward update to state terminology and related references. The bill’s title and structure suggest the controversy is less about substantive coastal policy changes than about the official naming convention the state should use.
The bill would amend numerous Texas statutes and code provisions to replace references to the “Gulf of Mexico” with “Gulf of America” in new and amended laws, and it would direct state agencies and legislative staff to use the new term in rules, publications, and related materials. It would also require the state’s agency-review process to identify statutory and regulatory revisions needed to implement the terminology change. Although most amendments are conforming, the bill touches many areas of law that depend on Gulf-bordering geography, including coastal management, public beaches, ports, navigation, water rights, environmental regulation, local government powers, taxation, and offshore-related provisions, thereby affecting state agencies, coastal counties and municipalities, landowners, and regulated industries along the Texas coast.
The available voting history shows the bill moved forward with majority support but notable opposition, passing the Senate on second reading 20–11 and on third reading 21–10. That pattern suggests the bill had enough support to advance, but it was not broadly consensus-driven. No committee transcript was provided, so there is no additional recorded discussion in the supplied materials to indicate a more nuanced committee sentiment.
The central point of contention is the bill’s directive to use “Gulf of America” instead of “Gulf of Mexico” in Texas law and state publications. Critics are likely to view the change as unnecessary, symbolic, or politically motivated, while supporters likely see it as a preferred and more accurate terminology standard. A secondary issue is the bill’s sweeping scope: it makes conforming edits across many unrelated code chapters, which may raise concerns about the administrative burden of updating statutes, rules, forms, and publications even though the underlying legal programs generally remain the same.