Brad DeLong's Semi-Daily Journal (2004)

Why Is One of Our Fleet Carriers Named the John C. Stennis?

I want to second Gregg Easterbrook's proposal to rename the Carl Vinson and the John C. Stennis. Those names are embarrassing. Great dead presidents, yes. Successful victorious battles, yes. But Senate Armed Services Committee Chairmen, no.

The New Republic Online: Easterbrook: Worse, the Navy has begun to name ships for chairmen of congressional committees. The carriers John C. Stennis and Carl Vinson prowl the seas. The leading accomplishment of these two gentlemen was that they never once said the word "no" to the Pentagon on any budget request. Carl Vinson and John Stennis were not presidents, war heroes, great leaders, or inspirational figures. They chaired the Armed Services Committees of the House and Senate and were rubber stamps for appropriations; now each has a carrier named after him. Vinson and Stennis were perfectly respectable members of Congress, and being a member of the people's legislature is an admirable thing. But thousands of men and women were perfectly respectable members of Congress and don't have ships named after them. Only the Armed Services Committee chairmen have ships named after them. It's unseemly.

UPDATE: Maybe I have too many lawyers in the family, but I want to come out in favor of the brilliant suggestion of naming capital ships after clauses of the constitution. Think of the honor of our adversaries. Would you rather be attacked by warplanes from the "John C. Stennis" or from the "Right to Bear Arms"? From the "Carl Vinson" or from the "Freedom of Speech"? From the "Jimmy Carter" or from the "Equal Protection"?