Overview
Title
An Act To designate the Federal building located at 985 Michigan Avenue in Detroit, Michigan, as the Rosa Parks Federal Building, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The bill is about giving a new name, the "Rosa Parks Federal Building," to a government building in Detroit, but it doesn't say why or explain what the changes in old laws mean.
Summary AI
The bill S. 1278 proposes to officially name the Federal building at 985 Michigan Avenue in Detroit, Michigan, as the "Rosa Parks Federal Building." This designation means that all official references to the building will use this new name. Additionally, the bill repeals certain sections of two previous public laws, Public Law 109–98 and Public Law 109–101.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The legislation at hand, identified as S. 1278, proposes to give the federal building located at 985 Michigan Avenue in Detroit, Michigan, a new designation as the "Rosa Parks Federal Building." This straightforward act involves a change in name and includes modifications to existing laws, notably the repeal of certain prior public laws, specifically Public Law 109-98 and selected sections of Public Law 109-101. The change underscores a symbolic recognition, aligning the building’s name with a prominent figure in American civil rights history.
Summary of Significant Issues
Firstly, the bill does not provide any background or rationale for the decision to rename the federal building after Rosa Parks. This omission could lead to questions regarding the intentions and motivations behind this symbolic gesture. The absence of a stated reason may influence the public's perception, potentially leading to debates over whether this is a case of government favoritism or unnecessary action.
Additionally, the bill calls for the repeal of specific parts of previous public laws, yet it does not clarify the nature or content of these laws. Without understanding the implications of these repeals, it is challenging to foresee the broader legal or operational consequences that may arise from these changes.
Finally, the bill lacks details on any budgetary impacts or financial considerations associated with the renaming and legal changes, raising potential concerns about government spending oversight. It remains unclear whether these actions involve significant costs and, if so, whether such expenditures are justified or constitute inefficiencies.
Potential Impacts on the Public
From a broad perspective, the bill could have a positive cultural impact by honoring Rosa Parks, a key figure in the civil rights movement, thereby reinforcing values of equality and justice. Renaming a federal building after someone who exemplified nonviolent activism could serve as a daily reminder of these principles to the public and visitors.
Conversely, without justifications or financial transparency, segments of the public might view this action as lacking in substantiated purpose. Questions might arise concerning whether resources spent on this initiative could have been better allocated elsewhere, reflecting concerns over fiscal responsibility.
Potential Impacts on Stakeholders
For stakeholders such as historians, activists, or organizations dedicated to civil rights, the renaming of the federal building could be perceived positively, serving as an acknowledgment of Rosa Parks' enduring legacy. It could potentially increase public interest and engagement in civil rights history and advocacy.
On the other hand, stakeholders within government agencies and departments affected by the changes to existing laws might face operational uncertainties due to the repeal of previous legal frameworks. In terms of fiscal management, stakeholders may express the need for clarity on budgetary implications to ensure responsible financial planning and allocation of public funds.
In conclusion, while naming a federal building after Rosa Parks undoubtedly carries significant symbolic weight, addressing the noted issues regarding rationale, legal implications, and financial transparency could enhance public understanding and acceptance of the proposed changes.
Issues
The text does not provide any context or justification for the naming or renaming of the Federal building, which could raise concerns about the motivation behind this decision as well as the significance of the dedication to Rosa Parks. This might be significant for public perception and evaluation of potential issues such as favoritism or unnecessary government action. (Section 1)
The repeal of Public Law 109-98 and Sections 1 and 2 of Public Law 109-101 lacks context regarding the implications of these legal changes. Likely, an analysis of what these eliminated laws entailed could reveal potential legal or operational impacts resulting from their repeals. (Section 1.C)
The section does not specify any budgetary implications or changes in expenditure related to the renaming or legal modifications, which are crucial for determining potential financial impacts and accountability. This omission could indicate possible wasteful spending or a lack of financial oversight. (Section 1)
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Rosa Parks Federal Building Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The federal building at 985 Michigan Avenue in Detroit, Michigan, will officially be called the "Rosa Parks Federal Building," according to the bill. It also states that any old references to this building in government records or documents will now use the new name, and it repeals certain parts of two previous public laws.