[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 99 (Tuesday, June 19, 2007)]
[House]
[Page H6723]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[[Page H6723]]
{time} 1830
RENAMING THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, as of today, H.R. 346, my
legislation to designate the Department of Navy as the Department of
Navy and Marine Corps, has 60 cosponsors.
The language of this bill has already passed the full House of
Representatives last month as part of the 2008 National Defense
Authorization Act. This is the sixth year in a row that the House has
voted to support this change.
As a Member of Congress, I have heard for 14 years that the Navy and
Marine Corps are one fighting team. If this is true, should not the
team carry the name of both the Navy and the Marine Corps? The Marines
do not serve beneath the Navy, they are coequal partners.
I was very pleased to read a comment by the new Senate Armed Services
Committee chairman, Carl Levin, in an article by The Hill newspaper
last month, May 24, 2007, and I quote, ``When asked, Levin said he
would 'keep an open mind' on whether to support [language in the House
bill to change the name of the Navy to the Department of Navy and
Marine Corps].''
Mr. Speaker, there is no cost to this change. Renaming the Department
is a symbolic gesture, but is very important to the team. It is the
right thing to do for the team.
Let me quote the Honorable Wade Sanders, Deputy Assistant Secretary
of the Navy for Reserve Affairs between the years 1993 and 1998. He
voiced his support for this change, and I quote, ``As a combat veteran
and former Naval officer, I understand the importance of the team
dynamic, and the importance of recognizing the contributions of team
components.
``The Navy and Marine Corps team is just that, a dynamic partnership,
and it is important to symbolically recognize the balance of that
partnership.''
I will also quote Admiral Stansfield Turner, United States Navy,
Retired, former Director of Central Intelligence, who said, and I
quote, ``I think this change in title enhances the prestige and pride
of the people in the Marine Corps. And it does not necessarily take
away anything from the Navy in that process.''
Mr. Speaker, last year, an editorial in the Chicago Tribune on April
21 of 2006 also supported the change stating, and I quote, ``No service
branch shows more respect for tradition than the United States Marine
Corps does, which makes it all the more ironic that tradition denies
the Corps an important show of respect: Equal billing with the other
service branches.''
That again, Mr. Speaker, is from the Chicago Tribune.
Mr. Speaker, to further state the importance of this, I have beside
me an enlargement of the orders for the Silver Star for a Marine from
Camp Lejeune who was killed in Iraq. It says, ``The Secretary of the
Navy Washington, DC., Navy flag, the President of the United States
take pleasure in presenting the Silver Star to the family.'' I will not
read in its entirety.
But Mr. Speaker, I'd like to show you what, if the Senate will accept
the House position, what this does. With the same orders for the Silver
Star for this brave Marine who gave his life for this country, it says,
``The Secretary of the Navy and Marine Corps, Washington, DC.,'' with
the zip code. It still has the Navy flag on one side and the Marine
flag.
Mr. Speaker, it is time that the Senate accept the House position.
This is the right thing to do for the fighting team. The team is the
Navy and Marine Corps fighting team. And I hope that the Senate, and
I'm very encouraged by Chairman Levin that he said, ``I'm open to the
thought of this possibility.''
So with that, Mr. Speaker, I ask God to please bless our men and
women in uniform and to please bless the United States of America.
____________________