Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Congress Bill Spotlight: Department of War Restoration Act

News

The U.S. Pentagon.

President Trump’s executive order renames the Pentagon the Department of War, reviving a historic title and sparking new debate in Congress.

Getty Images, Westend61

1970s funk band War also changed their name, having previously been known as both The Creators and later Nightshift.

What the legislation does


On Sept. 5, President Donald Trump signed an executive order renaming the Department of Defense as the Department of War. This would also allow the Secretary of Defense, currently Pete Hegseth, to be known as the Secretary of War.

That same week, congressional Republicans introduced legislation to make these name changes permanent. The Department of War Restoration Act was introduced by Rep. Greg Steube (R-FL17) in the House and Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) in the Senate.

Context

For most of American history, the department was indeed known as the Department of War. But after World War II, Congress enacted the National Security Act of 1947 to better unify the military branches, since the Army and Navy had been overseen by separate departments.

For two years, this new comprehensive department was called the National Defense Establishment. But in 1949, the name was changed to the Department of Defense in response to the Soviet Union acquiring nuclear bombs.

“The anodyne appellation was intended so as not to provoke the paranoia of the Politburo,” Michael Keane, a fellow of the National Security Education Program, wrote in an opinion column for The Hill.

“In the newly nuclear age, with military strategies struggling to catch up with apocalyptic weaponry, a less bellicose-sounding military establishment seemed to make sense in the service of preventing an atomic extinction event.”

What supporters say

Supporters argue that the reinstituted name is tougher, stronger, and returns to a time-honored heritage.

“From 1789 until the end of World War II, the United States military fought under the banner of the Department of War. Thanks to their courage and sacrifice, the standard of excellence was established for all servicemembers who followed in their footsteps,” Rep. Steube said in a press release. “It is only fitting that we pay tribute to their eternal example and renowned commitment to lethality by restoring the name.”

“For the first 150 years of our military’s history, Americans defeated their enemies and protected their homeland under the War Department,” Sen. Lee said in a separate press release. “[The bill would] make President Trump’s return to tradition permanent in federal law. It should always be clear to anyone who would harm our people: Americans don’t just play defense.”

What opponents say

Opponents counter that the renaming is belligerent, unnecessary, and duplicitous.

“Given the Trump administration’s repeated emphasis on fiscal restraint—particularly its aggressive use of illegal impoundments and now, unconstitutional pocket rescissions—this symbolic renaming is both wasteful and hypocritical,” 10 Senate Democrats wrote to the Congressional Budget Office. “It appears to prioritize political theater over responsible governance, while diverting resources from core national security functions.”

Odds of passage

The House bill has attracted 10 Republican cosponsors, while the Senate bill has attracted two Republican cosponsors. Either awaits a potential vote in their respective chamber’s Armed Services Committee, both controlled by the GOP.

House Republicans also introduced two other bills in September to make the same policy change, though neither has yet attracted any cosponsors. Rep. John McGuire (VA-5) introduced the Peace Through Strength Act, while Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN2) introduced another bill, named the Restoring the United States Department of War Act.

Competing proposals

Sens. Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD) and Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) introduced a competing bill: the Department of Defense’s Cost of War Act. It would require any expenditures associated with the renaming to come out of the Defense Secretary’s personal travel budget.

While not explicitly introduced in response to Trump's renaming, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN5) introduced a February bill to create a Department of Peacekeeping—essentially the opposite of a “Department of War.” That bill has attracted 38 Democratic cosponsors.

Jesse Rifkin is a freelance journalist with The Fulcrum. Don’t miss his report, Congress Bill Spotlight, on The Fulcrum. Rifkin’s writings about politics and Congress have been published in the Washington Post, Politico, Roll Call, Los Angeles Times, CNN Opinion, GovTrack, and USA Today.

SUGGESTIONS:

Congress Bill Spotlight: No Social Media at School Act

Congress Bill Spotlight: Make Entertainment Great Again (MEGA) Act, Renaming Kennedy Center to Trump Center

Congress Bill Spotlight: Anti-Rigging Act, Banning Mid-Decade Redistricting As Texas and California Are Attempting

Congress Bill Spotlight: Banning Trump Administration From Renaming Naval Ship Harvey Milk


Read More

The Trump Administration’s Plan for Protecting Consumers? Politely Ask Companies to Behave.

Russell Vought, the acting director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, testified before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs in July.

Samuel Corum/Sipa USA via AP Images

The Trump Administration’s Plan for Protecting Consumers? Politely Ask Companies to Behave.

In mid-July testimony before Congress, Russell Vought boasted that, as the acting head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, he’d refashioned the agency’s approach to pursuing banks and other financial companies accused of exploiting Americans — the role Congress had created for the agency after the 2008 economic crash.

Vought had spent the first 18 months of the new Trump administration trying to dismantle the bureau, much as he and other appointees had done with the U.S. Agency for International Development. At CFPB, he’d ordered mass layoffs, tried to choke off the bureau’s funding and ended the lease on its headquarters, attempting to make good on his vow to put civil servants “in trauma.” But federal courts blocked Vought’s efforts to close the CFPB, with a judge at one point saying the administration had acted with “complete disregard” for Congress.

Keep ReadingShow less
​Teal shoes are displayed outside Naval Medical Center Portsmouth

Teal shoes are displayed outside Naval Medical Center Portsmouth in April 2018 as part of Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention Month.

Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Kris R. Lindstrom/U.S. Navy

Military Sexual Trauma Survivors Can’t Sue the Government. A New Bill Could Change That.

When Mayra Diaz opened the door of her Army barracks room in 2022, she didn’t realize it was the beginning of the end of her military career.

She had never met the soldier standing in front of her, Sgt. Greville Clarke. She didn’t know he had sexually assaulted three other women on base over the past 15 months, including one he threatened at knifepoint.

Keep ReadingShow less
​Horizontal photo of a DEMOCRATIC PARTY FLAG

Horizontal photo of a DEMOCRATIC PARTY FLAG with a stylized DONKEY with 3 white stars on blue top of donkey and two red feet. Flag is laying on top of a red, white, and blue American Flag.

Getty Images

How to Define the Democratic Party - Left or Centrist?

Labels can be misleading and misused. The label "Centrist" is empowering because it signifies you are mainstream, not extreme, a place where all people can come together. To be labeled "Left" is to place you outside the mainstream, extreme; left connotes a kind of kookiness as well as—horror of horrors—Socialism.

But are the labels accurate? For most of the 20th century, the Democratic Party was, without question, the party that championed the working man, the average person—the people. But they were nevertheless firm capitalists—they were not Socialists.

Keep ReadingShow less
Illustration of US Capitol

Illustration of US Capitol

Illustration provided

Are States and Localities Required to Cooperate with ICE?

Polls show a majority of Americans disapprove of how Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is doing its job, with outrage stoked by a surge in immigration arrests across the country and multiple killings by federal immigration officials. In many places, residents are against their state and local officials cooperating with immigration authorities. And many local law enforcement leaders argue that cooperating with federal immigration enforcement operations undermines public safety by taking resources away from local priorities and eroding communities’ trust in law enforcement.

Trump administration officials have repeatedly argued that states and localities are legally obligated to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement efforts. They have also warned that state and local laws limiting cooperation with ICE will be met with harsh crackdowns.

Keep ReadingShow less