Changing the Navy's official name to include the Marine Corps would not have much adverse budgetary effect, according to a brief Congressional Budget Office report released last week.
Reps. Walter Jones (R-NC) and Paul Broun (R-GA) introduced a bill on Jan. 3 that would redesignate the Department of the Navy the Department of the Navy and Marine Corps. CBO's Jan. 31 analysis states:
CBO anticipates that the bill would have very little effect on most U.S. Naval or Marine Corps installations since signage, service flags, and other items bearing the emblems or names of the Navy or Marine Corps generally do not reference the Department of the Navy and would not need to be replaced. In addition, since the commanding officers of U.S. military installations and other senior-level positions within the department change on a relatively frequent and routine basis, the budgetary impact of the bill would be small if purchasing of materials, such as stationery, were coordinated with those changes of command and appointments. CBO anticipates that the cost of implementing this bill would be less than $500,000 a year, over the next several years, from appropriated funds.
Enacting the bill would not affect direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.
Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos, during his Senate confirmation hearing in September 2010, reluctantly suggested that a name change might be warranted, as Inside the Navy reported at the time:
Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) a former Marine, Naval Academy graduate and Navy Secretary, pushed the subject when he questioned Amos during his Sept. 21 nomination hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee. Webb argued that the change would overturn more than 200 years of tradition.
Amos noted that general officers have historically avoided being drawn into the debate, which he called a "political effort."
"It's probably not appropriate for the commandant of the Marine Corps as a service chief to weigh in," he said.
However, he added, "Do I need to dig into this a little bit more here and reveal myself?"
Webb prodded him, asking if there might be budgetary benefits for the Marine Corps in such a change.
Amos responded with a gloss of the Corps' history, noting that at one time the Marine Corps commandant was not even considered a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
"This whole process has been evolutionary since the beginning of the Department of the Navy," he said. "I think if you talk to the Marines out there … where we are in 2010 today, because of where we have evolved, we are a pretty formidable force for our nation. And I think just viscerally … the average fleet Marine would look at the secretary [of the Navy] and say, 'Yeah, I'd like him to be called the secretary of the Navy and the secretary of the Marine Corps.'"
While he acknowledged Webb's concerns about breaking tradition, he added, "We paid a pretty healthy price in the last nine to 10 years of combat and we feel pretty relevant right now."