Texas House Bill HB356

Texas 2017 - 85th 1st C.S.

Caption

Relating to monuments and memorials for Texas heroes and other persons and events of historical significance; creating criminal offenses.

Impact

The impact of HB356 extends into the realm of state laws by creating specific guidelines for the erection, alteration, and potential removal of monuments and memorials dedicated to Texas heroes and significant events. By centralizing the authority under the Texas Historical Commission, the bill seeks to standardize the process and ensure that local governments do not act unilaterally, which could lead to a diverse and potentially conflicting array of memorials. Critics may argue that this could overshadow local perspectives and the unique stories of communities, potentially stifling local participation in historical preservation.

Summary

House Bill 356, known as the Texas Hero Protection Act, proposes significant changes to the regulation and management of monuments and memorials in Texas. The bill defines a monument or memorial as any permanent item officially designated as historically significant, including statues, plaques, and building names. It stipulates that these items may be erected on state or county property, with the requirement that the Texas Historical Commission must approve new monuments, ensuring that any erected honors significant Texas figures or events appropriately. This legislative move underscores the state’s commitment to preserving its historical narrative amidst varying societal views on historical figures.

Contention

One notable point of contention surrounding this bill is the criminalization of the unauthorized removal, relocation, or alteration of monuments and memorials. Under the provisions of HB356, individuals who violate the specified regulations could face fines and even jail time. This aspect of the bill has raised debates among legislators and constituents regarding the balance between preserving history and addressing appropriateness in representation. Opponents might argue that the bill could be used to protect controversial monuments that may not align with contemporary values, thus complicating discussions about historical memory and future representation in public spaces.