Ft. Benning – which, until this week was called Ft. Moore, GA – is once again Ft. Benning.
It’s an unnecessary, confusing, costly mess.
And your tax dollars are gonna pay for it.
According to estimates by The Military Times, during the Biden Administration it cost the nation $39 million to change the names of nine Confederate-honoring USA military bases. Among these bases was Ft. Benning, which was named for Brig. Gen. Henry L. Benning, a Confederate officer and ardent opponent to the abolition of slavery.
Costs incurred in the base renamings included replacing monikers at installation gates, on facilities, streets, highway directive signage, numerous smaller signs, and within databases.
At the time, the move was lauded by those who believed that United States military bases should honor soldiers who fought on behalf of the United States (as opposed to against it) and should reflect a military that respects the approximately 21 percent of its forces (as of 2020 statistics) who are Black.
Opponents to the name changes called them virtue signaling, and cited both the “loss” or “erasure” of history (Ft. Benning was established in 1918 in Columbus, GA, as Camp Benning, becoming a fort in 1922), as well as the costs associated with name changes, as reasons the nine should keep their names.
The names were changed.
In Benning’s case, the name was changed to Ft. Moore, in honor of Lt. Gen. Hal Moore and his wife, Julia Compton Moore, who was instrumental in facilitating the military’s modern casualty alert system.
Ft. Benning/Moore/Benning was unique in that it become the first and only US military base to be named for both a decorated soldier – Moore received numerous military honors for his service in the Korean and Vietnam Wars, which was the subject of the 2002 film We Were Soldiers – and his spouse. In naming the Fort for both Hal and Julia, the military called attention not only to the distinguished service of its soldiers, but also to the sacrifices and contributions made by military spouses.
Both Hal and Julia are buried on base.
This week, Sec. of Defense Pete Hegseth has declared that Ft. Moore will/has reverted to its previous moniker – Ft. Benning – with all of the ensuing changes (and costs) that change will incur. Though this time he says the Fort will be named in honor of Cpl. Fred G. Benning, who served with distinction in WWI.
Fred Benning’s service is laudable. The same can be said of many men and women who have served our great nation with honor. But we don’t go about renaming military bases for no reason.
As this is an OpEd, I’ll just come out and say it: Why? Why is the present administration putting its efforts into this action?
Why are our tax dollars being used, again, on what certainly, at this time, is an unnecessary name change?
The previous name changes were done so as not to continue to honor soldiers who rebelled against the United States 160 years ago. Those men and anyone who knew them are long-since deceased. In fact, Henry Benning did not even live to see Ft. Benning named for him. He died in 1875.
While we all have our political leanings and beliefs, I – a Columbus, GA, resident – have never heard a negative word uttered about the Moores. While some may have been unhappy that Ft. Benning’s name was changed at all, you’d be hard-pressed to find anyone here who’d say the Moores were undeserving of the naming honor.
Cases-in-point:
Retired Maj. Gen. Patrick Donahoe, who served as commanding general of the Maneuver Center of Excellence at Fort Benning until July 2022, told News 3:
“We should understand the upsides in naming our local base after both LTG Hal and his wife, Julia Moore. The renaming honored our Korean and Vietnam War veterans while also uniquely recognizing the vital role of military spouses by naming the installation after both a Soldier and their spouse. This is the only military post in the nation named for a married couple who exemplify service, sacrifice, and unwavering character.”
Former Fort Benning Garrison Commander, retired Brig. Gen. Andy Hilmes, put the present situation plainly:
“The renaming of DoD installations has become a highly emotional and politicized subject. It pains me to see fellow Americans so divided on this matter. America is at its best when its people are united. Hal & Julia Moore, who made much of the history they are famous for here in the Chattahoochee Valley, were uniters of men, women, and families of all colors, religions, and backgrounds. The blended human fabric of the modern U.S. Army enabled any success I was involved in during 28 years of service to the nation. Requiring Fort Moore to undergo a name change twice in as many years not only invites taxpayers to question the appropriate use of resources, but also reopens old, divisive wounds that distract us from moving forward together on more complex and far-reaching matters. Further, it indirectly politicizes an institution every American expects to remain apolitical, regardless of who the commander-in-chief is.”
Columbus Mayor Skip Henderson told local ABC affiliate Channel 9 that Columbus supports its base and its troops no matter the name, but emphasized the financial implications.
“What it will require is some funding. There’s going to be a lot of money put in at the Maneuver Center of Excellence to get the name changed. We had just changed the name of the bridge. An anonymous donor had helped with that. And of course DOT has a lot of signs on the interstate that say ‘Fort Moore.’ I think that will be one of the significant challenges for the Army to complete that transition all over again, and we will do whatever we can to try and assist them in that endeavor,” Henderson said.
Costs are also more than financial.
The name change is also causing distress to the Moore family. David Moore, Hal and Julia’s son and himself an Army colonel, spoke to Task & Purpose about the pain Hegseth’s decision is causing himself and his family.
“We’re saddened; I’m personally angered that the secretary of defense in choosing the characteristics and qualities he wanted of the renaming, he chose to reject Hal and Julia Moore, and those very qualities and characteristics that they already represent. I think that they have done a disservice to my parents in their zeal to rename Benning for the Benning name,” Moore said.
“I don’t want to diminish anything that Cpl. Fred Benning achieved. He was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross, as my father was, and that’s a great award for heroism. And so, I don’t take anything from him. I just adamantly, firmly believe that Secretary Hegseth already had what he sought, when you read the public announcement of renaming Fort Moore as Fort Benning. And it’s just very disappointing, saddening, and I guess to some degree, I’m angry that the secretary of defense was unwilling or unable to see the value of Hal and Julia Moore and Fort Moore and what it could mean to the future of the Army.”
Noting the pain that this decision is causing distinguished service members, the Moore family, and, notably, the taxpayers’ wallets – I ask again: Why?
Why, in an administration that claims to be rooting out government overreach and unnecessary spending, is $ millions going to investigating rosters of soldiers whose names match those of Confederate servicemen, just so American forts can be reverted back to their old names but with new guises?
That isn’t fiscal conservatism. It’s government overreach. It’s waste.
And I, for one, am sick of footing the bill for it.
Erin Greer
Erin Greer is an award-winning journalist whose work has appeared in digital, print, and television mediums across many publications. She served as managing editor for two national publications with focuses on municipal governments. She resides in Columbus.
Note: This is an opinion article as designated by the the category placement on this website. It is not news coverage. If this disclaimer is funny to you, it isn’t aimed at you — but some of your friends and neighbors honestly have trouble telling the difference.
