[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 84 (Monday, June 8, 2009)]
[House]
[Pages H6293-H6294]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




REDESIGNATING THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY AS THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
                            AND MARINE CORPS

  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. Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleagues in the House 
from both parties for joining me as cosponsors of H.R. 24, legislation 
to redesignate the Department of the Navy as the Department of the Navy 
and Marine Corps. As of today, this legislation has 278 bipartisan 
cosponsors.
  For the past 7 years, the language of this bill has been part of the 
House version of the National Defense Authorization Act. Each year, the 
full House of Representatives has supported this change. This year, I 
am grateful to have the support of Senator Pat Roberts, a former 
marine, who introduced the same bill in the Senate, S. 504. With his 
help, I am hopeful that this will be the year the Senate supports the 
House's position and joins in bringing proper respect to the fighting 
team of the Navy and Marine Corps.
  The Navy and Marine Corps have operated as one entity for more than 
two centuries, and H.R. 24 would allow the name of their Department to 
illustrate this fact. This legislation is not about changing the 
responsibilities of the Secretary of the Department, reallocating 
resources between the Navy and Marine Corps or altering their missions. 
Redesignating the Department as the Department of the Navy and Marine 
Corps is a symbolic gesture, but it is important to the team.
  Over the years, I have been encouraged by the overwhelming support 
for this change that I have received from so many members of the United 
States Armed Forces. Last month, I received a letter from retired 
Marine Colonel Giles Kyser, who kindly expressed his support for H.R. 
24.
  He wrote, ``As a combat commander of marines and sailors in Iraq, I 
submit that no one understands the parity of the two services better 
than the corpsmen and chaplains serving alongside `their marines.' I 
dare say, if you asked any one of those sailors to voice an opinion 
about the proposed change, most would wonder why our country took so 
long to take this simple action.''
  The colonel further wrote, ``When President Truman considered 
disbanding the Marine Corps after World War II in 1946, then Commandant 
of the Marine Corps, Medal of Honor recipient Alexander Vandergrift 
brought the issue before the Congress of the United States. The general 
merely presented the Marine Corps' combat lineage and let those actions 
speak for themselves. After hearing the general's remarks, our 
congressional leaders did the right thing: not only preserving our 
Corps but ensuring its roles, missions; and even its size became part 
of the law of the land.''
  The colonel further stated in his letter, ``The stroke of a pen, 
adding three words `and Marine Corps,' will complete General 
Vandergrift's action of some 63 years ago; will ensure our leaders, 
their staffs and their constituents clearly recognize the coequal 
status of the Marine Corps; and will ensure once and for all time the 
equality of our marines in the eyes of the Nation and its people.''
  Madam Speaker, I submit the full text of Colonel Kyser's letter for 
the Record.
                                                     May 14, 2009.
     Congressman Walter B. Jones
     House of Representatives,
     Rayburn Building, Washington, DC.
       Congressman Jones, Per our discussions on 12 May I wanted 
     to pass on a few suggestions regarding your proposed Bill 
     (H.R. 24) ``To redesignate the Department of the Navy as the 
     Department of the Navy and Marine Corps.'' I believe your 
     initiative comes at a time in the history of our Nation and 
     of our Navy and Marine Corps when permanently establishing 
     the Marine Corps' parity as an equal service with the Army, 
     Navy, and Air Force constitutes an ethical and practical 
     imperative not only from the standpoint of history, but from 
     the standpoint of educating key leaders and their staffs.
       Your efforts to-date clearly underscore why according the 
     Marine Corps equal status within the Department of Defense 
     constitutes the ``right thing to do.'' The contributions of 
     our Marines, written in blood across the globe during our 
     current contingency operations merit a change raising the 
     awareness of the Nation and its leaders regarding the role 
     our Marines play in their defense. Moreover, and if only as a 
     supporting argument, how many Americans truly at understand 
     that the sacrifices made since September 11 2001 by our 
     Marines always take place with Sailors at their side on the 
     battlefield? Those Sailors, who while at

[[Page H6294]]

     their side, often provide either the immediate aid that saves 
     their lives, or the special comfort of a comrade during their 
     final moments on this earth. Such is the unshakable bond of 
     the Marines and Sailors who live at the tip of the spear, 
     where the measure of a man or woman's life is defined by 
     actions, and where moments of courage and compassion confer a 
     nobility that clearly compels equal recognition in the eyes 
     of the citizens they defend.
       As a combat commander of Marines and Sailors in Iraq, I 
     submit that no one understands the parity of the two services 
     better than the Corpsmen and Chaplains serving alongside 
     ``their Marines.'' I dare say that if you asked any one of 
     those Sailors to voice an opinion about the proposed change 
     that they would support the change with the same degree of 
     commitment they always show ``their Marines'' and, most would 
     wonder why our country took so long to take this simple 
     action.
       After all is said and done, the substance of the proposed 
     change focuses us on the young men and women who willingly 
     gave the last full measure of devotion to this country. The 
     redesignation honors them and constitutes an ethical 
     imperative. * * * it is the right thing to do and we must do 
     it.
       The second imperative revolves around a very practical 
     truth. In an environment where decisions taken find their 
     foundation in understanding the context of the issue, most 
     Americans, even those here in the rarefied air of Washington 
     DC, simply do not realize that the Department of the Navy 
     includes both the Navy and Marine Corps. The practical result 
     of that lack of knowledge finds very concrete expression in 
     the history of deliberation and budgets within the Department 
     of Defense. Many Congressional, White House, and even 
     Department of Defense staffers must constantly be reminded 
     that the Department of the Navy, and its total obligation 
     authority includes both the Navy and the Marine Corps in 
     order to avoid cutting away the muscle of the Corps as it 
     competes for funding. The Marine Corps' advertising efforts 
     and information campaign within the Capital Region help to 
     overcome the challenge, but why should the Marine Corps and 
     the Department of the Navy have to begin their efforts from a 
     position of informational weakness? Certainly, the stroke of 
     a pen changing the existing designation provides a 
     demonstrable first step in overcoming the positional deficit 
     plaguing the Corps since its inception some two hundred and 
     thirty-four years ago.
       Indeed, when President Truman considered disbanding the 
     Marine Corps after World War II in 1946, then Commandant of 
     the Marine Corps, Medal of Honor recipient Alexander 
     Vandergrift brought the issue before the Congress of the 
     United States. The General merely presented the Marine Corps' 
     combat lineage and let those actions speak for themselves. He 
     refused to, in his words, come on ``bended knee'' to argue 
     the case for Marines and Sailors who served so bravely and 
     brilliantly in places like Tripoli, Montezuma, Belleau Wood, 
     Tarawa, and Iwo Jima. After hearing the General's remarks, 
     our Congressional Leaders did the right thing; not only 
     preserving our Corps, but ensuring its roles, missions, and 
     even its size became part of the law of the land.
       It is time again for our Congressional Leaders to ``do the 
     right thing'' in a time when fiscal reality might again place 
     our Marines and the Sailors who serve with them at a 
     disadvantage born not from malice aforethought as was the 
     case in 1946, but born of a lack of education existing for 
     more than two hundred and thirty years. The stroke of a pen, 
     adding three words ``and Marine Corps'' will complete General 
     Vandegrift's action of some sixty-three years ago, will 
     ensure our leaders, their staffs, and their constituents 
     clearly recognize the co-equal status of the Marine Corps 
     and, will ensure once and for all time, the equality of our 
     Marines in the eyes of the Nation and its people. This is not 
     a request made from a ``bended knee.'' It is a request made 
     from the position of attention, facing forward, but not 
     forgetting the sacrifice of those Marines and Sailors of the 
     past. The change constitutes an ethical and practical 
     imperative and is ``the right thing to do.''
           Very respectfully,
                                             James Giles Kyser IV,
                             Colonel, U.S. Marine Corps (Retired).

  Madam Speaker, the marines who are fighting today deserve this 
recognition--those living and fighting and those who have given their 
lives for this country.
  I have beside me an actual copy of a letter that was sent to a marine 
family. This is the way it is today--the Secretary of the Navy with the 
Navy flag. ``Dear Marine Corps family, on behalf of the Department of 
the Navy, we extend our deepest sympathy in the loss of your loved 
one.''
  Madam Speaker, if H.R. 24 and Senate 504 become the law of the land, 
it will be the way it should be to a family--to a Marine family who 
gave a life for this country. It will say the Secretary of the Navy and 
the Marine Corps, and it will have the Navy flag and the Marine flag. 
It will say, ``Dear Marine Corps family, on behalf of the Department of 
the Navy and the Marine Corps, please accept my sincere condolences on 
the loss of your loved one.''
  This is all it is about--bringing the team together. It is time that 
the Marine Corps is recognized as part of the fighting team.
  With that, Madam Speaker, before I yield back my time, I will ask God 
to please bless our men and women in Afghanistan and Iraq. I will ask 
God to, please, with his loving arms, hold the families who have given 
children, dying for freedom in Afghanistan and Iraq. I close three 
times by asking God: God, please, God, please, God, please continue to 
bless America.

                          ____________________