A proposal moving forward in the Florida Senate would protect Confederate monuments and other historical markers.
In a 6-2 party-line vote, the Republican-controlled Community Affairs Committee on Wednesday backed the bill, which would allow people to file lawsuits if they believe they have "lost history" or the ability to teach about the past because of monuments being removed or relocated.
"What I like about these memorials in public places is that everybody has the opportunity to see who we were," bill sponsor Sen. Jonathan Martin told the Orlando Sentinel. "The older the monument, the more important it is, because it provides a starting point for what our country began as, who led our country."
The bill, known as the "Historical Monuments and Memorials Protection Act," would prevent local governments from removing historic monuments, many of which honor members of the Confederacy, and threaten legal action if they do. The proposal also prevents the addition of plaques or signs near controversial monuments that attempt to provide added historical context.
"Right now, we have a movement in this country to take down and destroy historic monuments," Santa Rosa County Commissioner James Calkins told the Miami Herald. "They started with Confederate monuments. It didn't end there. Christopher Columbus. George Washington's next. And we need to protect our monuments. We need to protect our history."
Not everyone is on board with the legislation. Jane Schletweg, chairwoman of the Collier County Democratic Party, told WINK that some of these monuments don't belong in public places -- such as memorials to honor those who supported slavery, like Robert E. Lee.
"They're not history; they are a reminder that there were a certain group of people in this country that decided that some men were better than others," Schletweg said. "I think that it's important that they're not seen as, you know, we're glorifying these men, and they're intent on destroying what the Founding Fathers had intended when they wrote the Constitution."
Jonathan Webber, with the Alabama-based SPLC Action Fund, told the Orlando Sentinel that the monuments deserve to be removed because they are "symbolic reminders of the racist social hierarchy that can still be felt today."
To that point, Martin told WINK it shouldn't matter if a monument is about honoring someone who was "good or...bad."
"Regardless of who a memorial represents, we need to understand that there's a lot to our history, there's a lot to individuals -- nobody's perfect," Martin said. "Whether you have a strong opinion about it or no opinion, we shouldn't be preventing other people from learning about our history."
The Senate bill moves to the Rules Committee for consideration before it reaches the Senate floor.
Meantime, a companion bill in the House recently passed the Constitutional Rights, Rule of Law and Government Operations Subcommittee and is now in front of the Judiciary Committee for consideration.
Bill sponsor Rep. Dean Black said it's about adding to our history, not subtracting from it.
"Iconoclasm is a tragedy today, but it is the greatest tragedy a century from now... when I have a great-great-great grandchild, will they walk though parks that are now sanitary of monuments? Because if my family's history is not safe today, no one's family's history is safe tomorrow," Black said in front of the subcommittee. "We're talking about history. It belongs to all of us."
"No mob from another city has a right to come rampage through Florida and tear down our monuments or intimidate other municipalities into doing it for fear of their own safety of their citizens if they don't," Black added. "If someone wants to tour Florida and go on a historic tour, they should be able to do that and see the history fully present -- not just what a local city council wants them to be able to see."
Related
Related
