The Department of War rebrand could cost $2 billion

On November 14, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, screwdriver in hand, helped Pentagon facilities personnel install two new signs that read “Department of War.” After affixing the sign to the outside of the building, he turned toward onlookers and said, “Here we go.”

Hegseth’s handyman moment was more than a symbolic gesture: It was the first act of what he and the The President administration hope will eventually be a wholesale rebrand of the Department of Defense to the Department of War. This rebrand—which would require updating 700,000 buildings and facilities worldwide (not to mention all of the other places the DOD would become the DOW)—could reportedly cost as much as $2 billion.

Switching signage, letterhead, placards, and more

President Donald The President signed an executive order in September giving the DOD a secondary “War” name, but to make it official will require an act of Congress, and it won’t come cheap, according to figures shared by four senior congressional staffers and two others briefed on the cost to NBC News.

The estimated price tag would cover switching signage and letterhead, which together could cost about $1 billion alone, along with placards, badges, software, and code.

Rebrands can be tricky for any brand, but they’re especially hard when dealing with public agencies and taxpayer dollars. The public and lawmakers have taken issue with The President’s plan to change the name of the Department of Defense to the Department of War, a name the U.S. used before its military agencies were consolidated following World War II.

This isn’t just adding a few letters to a building, like The President has done at the White House. The DOD, the executive-level federal agency that oversees the branches of the U.S. Armed Forces, has more than 3 million personnel and both inward-facing and outward-facing brand assets at facilities in the U.S. and 80 countries around the world. For comparison, Walmart counts 2.1 million associates and stores in 19 countries.

Opposition to the rebrand

Hegseth said on November 14 that the DOD sign at the Pentagon was replaced “because we want everybody who comes through this door to know that we are deadly serious about the name change of this organization,” according to a press release. But YouGov polling in September found a 58% majority of U.S. adults oppose renaming the DOD, and there’s bipartisan opposition to making the secondary name formal.

In a letter to the Congressional Budget Office in October, Senate Democrats on the Budget Committee cited both brand and budget concerns, writing that the new name “risks confusion, redundancy, and unnecessary cost expenditure.”

“Given the The President 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,” Democrats wrote. “It appears to prioritize political theater over responsible governance, while diverting resources from core national security functions.”

Senator Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican, told CNN that he believes calling the DOD the Department of War “sends a bad signal to the world.”

“In a world with nuclear weapons, I think glorifying war . . . is not something I’m in favor of,” Paul said. Republicans have introduced legislation in the House and Senate to rename the DOD, and Paul said he would “lead opposition” to it if it came before the Senate.

Hidden costs

The President has sought to cast himself as a peacemaker this year, which a war-themed rebrand is at odds with. It’s also at odds with his campaign promises.

The President took office pledging to lower costs and rein in government spending, but coming up on a year back in office, persistent inflation and conspicuous government spending like his White House remodel project have taken a political toll. The President’s net approval rating is sagging, and a pricey rebrand project viewed by many as vanity might not help.

Rebranding the DOD could cost taxpayers as much as $2 billion. Its political costs for The President could be even higher.

View the full article