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

FEMA Review Council Proposes Long List of Reforms to Federal Disaster Assistance

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Headquarters Building in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)

FEMA Review Council Proposes Long List of Reforms to Federal Disaster Assistance

WASHINGTON — Nearly a year after President Donald Trump threatened to abolish the Federal Emergency Management Agency, a review council he appointed released a final report on Thursday to overhaul the agency by reducing administrative costs and shifting responsibility for disaster response to states.

The review council was created in January 2025 through Executive Order 14180. According to the order, the council, led by Homeland Secretary Markwayne Mullin and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, was tasked with evaluating and improving the agency's efficacy and disaster response.

Keep ReadingShow less
What Will It Take To Truly Negotiate Paid Leave? Getting to "Yes" on Three Questions
blue and yellow i heart you print textile
Photo by Sandy Millar on Unsplash

What Will It Take To Truly Negotiate Paid Leave? Getting to "Yes" on Three Questions

Everyone in the United States deserves time to care for themselves and their loved ones, whether to see a baby’s first smile or hold the hand of a parent who takes their last. Last month, Virginia became one of a growing number of U.S. jurisdictions enacting statewide paid leave programs—forward-looking states that have taken matters into their own hands in the absence of a federal policy that the vast majority of the public across party lines wants and has wanted for quite some time.

Beginning in 2028, Virginia will join its regional mid-Atlantic neighbors, the District of Columbia, Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, and New York in guaranteeing this basic protection to millions of workers caring for a new child, a loved one, or their own serious health need. Pennsylvania’s legislature, too, is moving paid leave legislation, and with bipartisan support. Evidence shows that paid family and medical leave programs offer multiple sources of value to workers, families, businesses, and communities.

Keep ReadingShow less
DHS Funding During the Shutdown
Getty Images, Charles-McClintock Wilson

DHS Funding During the Shutdown

When Congress failed to approve funding for the Department of Homeland Security for the remainder of this fiscal year in February, almost all of its employees began to work without pay. That situation changed, however, on April 3, when President Donald Trump issued a memorandum ordering the DHS secretary and director of the Office of Management and Budget to “use funds that have a reasonable and logical nexus to the functions of DHS” to pay its employees and issue back pay.

Trump shifted money to avoid the political embarrassment that would be caused by the collapse of airport security screening through the actions of disgruntled agents and the disruption to air travel that would ensue. But it’s legally dubious.

Keep ReadingShow less
From Colombia to Connecticut: The urgent need to end FGM in the Americas

Journalists gather in front of the Connecticut State Capitol Building during a press conference on SB259 and an anti-FGM art installation

Bryna Subherwal, Equality Now

From Colombia to Connecticut: The urgent need to end FGM in the Americas

Across the Americas, hundreds of thousands of women and girls are living with or have undergone female genital mutilation (FGM). These affected populations are citizens and residents of countries where protections are incomplete, entirely focused on criminalisation, inconsistently enforced, or entirely absent.

FGM is not a “foreign” issue. It is a human rights violation unfolding within national borders, one that all governments in the Americas have the legal and moral responsibility to address.

Keep ReadingShow less