The U.S. Navy's leadership has again demonstrated its penchant for ignoring customs, traditions, and even Navy instructions when it comes to naming ships. The latest example is the decision to name the attack submarine SSN-785 for Senator John Warner (R-VA).
John Warner is an outstanding American. After enlisting in the Navy at age 17 in January 1945, he later transferred to the Marine Corps Reserve and served as a Marine officer in the Korean War. From 1969 to 1972 he was Under Secretary of the Navy and then succeeded to the position of Secretary, which he held until 1974. Subsequently he was elected to the U.S. Senate, where he served with distinction from January 1979 to January 2009. During those three decades he was a key member of the Armed Services Committee, having a major role in Secretary of the Navy John Lehman's fleet buildup, and he was a principal in the historic incidents-at-sea negotiations with the Soviet Navy.
Mr. Warner certainly deserves a Navy ship to be named after him—but not a submarine.
Historically destroyer-type ships have been named for naval heroes, admirals, inventors, and secretaries of the Navy. Attack submarines (SS/SSN) were traditionally named for fish and other marine life. But in the late 1960s Admiral Hyman G. Rickover, head of the Navy's nuclear propulsion program, pushed through a policy of naming SSNs for members of Congress who had supported his efforts to build an all-nuclear fleet. Hence, four SSNs were named for congressmen: William H. Bates (SSN-680), Glenard P. Lipscomb (SSN-685), L. Mendel Rivers (SSN-686), and Richard B. Russell (SSN-687). These names reflected an aphorism sometimes attributed to Rickover: "Fish don't vote."
The Navy's leadership was able to regain control of ship naming procedures and, beginning with the Los Angeles (SSN-688), launched in 1974, the official name source for SSNs was changed to American cities. Sixty-one boats of the Los Angeles class carried city names. However, in 1983 then-Secretary of the Navy Lehman directed that the SSN-705 be named Hyman G. Rickover, whom he had helped force to leave the Navy in 1982. Lehman's action, according to some press reports, was a means of preventing Rickover supporters in Congress from naming an aircraft carrier for him.
The nice, neat policy of naming submarines for cities met an ignominious end with the subsequent class. The SSN-21 program was undoubtedly the most controversial submarine class in American history with respect to its design, hull numbers assignment, and name sources. The SSN-21 reverted to a fish name when Seawolf was chosen for the lead submarine.
The name source changed again for the second submarine of the class, the SSN-22 being named the Connecticut. This was the first attack submarine to be named for a state and conflicted with the policy of naming ballistic-missile submarines (SSBN) for states.
Another name shift followed: Secretary of the Navy John Dalton (1993-98) assigned the name Jimmy Carter to the SSN-23. This was the first attack submarine to be named for a former President. Aircraft carriers and—in the late 1950s and 1960s—ballistic-missile submarines were named for former presidents. In view of Carter's opposition to carrier construction during his administration, it was considered highly unlikely that his name would be condoned for a carrier.
"Fish don't vote," and apparently neither do cities, for the Navy adopted state names for the next submarine class, led by the USS Virginia (SSN-774), completed in 2004. The next ten SSNs were named for states, causing confusion with the Navy's 14 Trident SSBNs and four former SSBNs converted to cruise missile/special forces submarines (SSGN), all of which have state names. Now, the 12th Virginia-class SSN returns to people as a name source.
The SSN-785 is named for Mr. Warner to honor his "lifetime of service to the Nation and the Commonwealth of Virginia," according to the Department of Defense.1 Having worked for him when he was Secretary of the Navy and having testified before him in the Senate and watching him close up, I can confirm that there can be no issue in naming a warship for Mr. Warner. The only issue is why again change the name source for submarines. Rather, he should be honored by an aircraft carrier (two CVNs have been named for members of Congress) or possibly the lead ship for the planned class of CG(X) cruisers—but not a submarine.
1. Department of Defense press release "Navy names Virginia Class Submarine USS John Warner" (No. 016-09 8 January 2009).