September 2, 2004

Is the U.S. ramping up the Draft?

By Kymberli W. Brady
Staff Writer

“I think, if we went home and found out that there were more families concerned about their kids going off to war, there would be more cautiousness and more willingness to work with the international community in dealing with Iraq, instead of just saying that it’s my way or the highway.”

Following those words, issued in a Dec. 2002 statement, New York Democratic Representative Charles B. Rangel, along with Senator Ernest F. Hollings of South Carolina introduced twin bills to the Senate and House of Representatives on Jan. 7, 2003 to reinstate the compulsory military service draft—which hasn’t seen the light of day since 1973.

“If our great country becomes involved in an all-out war, the sacrifice must be shared,” Rangel added. “In that regard, I am preparing legislation to authorize reinstatement of the universal draft and other forms of mandatory national service.”

An unprecedented deployment of reserves in Iraq, Afghanistan, and North Korea to “match the mission with the means” has created a firestorm that prompted the introduction of identical bills H.R.163 and S.89. Also known as the Universal National Service Act of 2003, they propose that every person between the ages of 18 and 26 residing in the U.S. be required to perform two-years of active military or civilian service as determined by the President.

The act would also lay down provisions governing deferments and exemptions, including the release of conscientious objectors from combat-related military service. And, for the first time in history, it would amend the Military Selective Service Act to authorize registration for women.

While the government denies rumors of any resurgence of the draft, genuine concerns have risen to the surface of the murky military pool, as to whether the U.S. is spread too thin under current conditions to effectively deactivate Al-Qaida, and defuse an explosive North Korea while maintaining adequate security on home soil—without beefing up its numbers.

Although the bills have languished in Congress for over a year, rumors that preparations are in place to ramp up for a military draft and have it ready to activate by June 2005 have been fueled in large part by an email that began circulating last February. According to the Urban Legends website, the likelihood of any reinstatement of the draft in the near future—especially 2005 is not expected, citing that both bills were introduced by Democrats, with no support from the current administration. And, for more than a year, they have languished in committee, with no further action taken.

While many politicians are speaking out on the subject, California representatives seem to be taking a more tight-lipped approach. According to a spokesperson for Arnold Schwarzenegger, the California governor has not taken a position on the matter, and he refused to speculate if he will.

Howard Gantman, spokesperson for California Senator Diane Feinstein says she has not spoken in support of the draft and has “not received any specific requests from the Pentagon that one is needed.”

However, Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren strongly opposes the idea and says that talks of reinstating the draft are largely fueled by fear given the current military situation.

“People are aware that we don’t have enough troops to sustain the military in Korea, Iraq, and Europe,” admits Lofgren. “It’s making them anxious. Recruitment is down and the military is stretched very thin. Young men are required to register when they turn 18, and that’s nothing new, but these two bills have gone nowhere and I oppose them.”

And yet, there are those in Washington who champion the idea, including the bill’s 13 co-sponsors in the U.S. House of Representatives.

With service experience in both conscription and professional Armies, Republican Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska doesn’t necessarily support a draft, but he remains concerned about the strength of the military down the road.

“The thought of bringing back some form of mandatory national service is understandably troubling,” Hagel says. “If the All Volunteer Force, which I strongly support, finds itself unable to meet the present day and future manpower demands required to maintain American security, the nation must be prepared to act to correct that dangerous possibility.”

Twenty-eight-year-old Sgt. Eric Barocio is an eight-year veteran and recruiter for the California Army National Guard on West Hedding Street in downtown San Jose. When asked how he would feel as a volunteer soldier fighting next to one who had been drafted, he admits that although there might be second thoughts in the beginning, the training and commitment would render the same type of soldier—one he would have no problem serving with.
“It’s the camaraderie that you learn more than anything else,” he says.

Hagel also argues that a draft would better spread the burden of military service among all socio-economic classes—a homogenizing process that would place high school dropouts and college graduates—the rich, middle class, and poor alike on even ground.

“No American is spared from this challenge, regardless of station in life,” he adds. “Yet, it is primarily middle and lower-middle class Americans who are carrying the burden and making the sacrifices.”

Still, the more weighty lack of support from either side of the political fence can be attributed in part to widespread opposition during the Vietnam War—and the fallout that resulted in an estimated 1.3 million military casualties.

While fears of dèjá vu continue to fuel the current anti-war movement, public opinion and economic instability could pose a threat to the nation’s political backbone.

According to a recent CNN-USA TODAY-Gallup Poll, an estimated 80 percent of Americans oppose the draft, while only 17 percent support it. However, speculation of a dwindling U.S. military personnel inventory, coupled with forecasts for a long, drawn out war in Iraq could force the draft conundrum back into the divided political arena just in time for the presidential election.

On July 8, the House Armed Services Committee held a hearing on the Iraq/Afghanistan troop rotation plan, where Dr. David Chu, Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, testified that despite current stresses, military retention remains good.

Chu denied rumors of any administration plans to reinstate the draft and warned that it would be, “ill-advised to try to replace the volunteers, who continue to sign up for service, with a set of people who do not want to volunteer.”

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld—who played a role in abolishing the draft in the 60s, says that the administration does not intend to pursue a draft. And the Selective Service argues that any ongoing effort to enhance the preparation process is simply a legal requirement. However, they do say they are prepared to implement one “if and when the President and the Congress so direct.”

According to Col. Ron Ray, a former Pentagon official during the Reagan administration, evidence of a possible draft looms within the Selective Service System’s Annual Performance Plan for Fiscal-Year 2004, which includes plans for a network of 1,980 local boards, 442 area offices, and 56 state headquarters, along with the placement of volunteer registrars in an estimated 85 percent of U.S. high schools. However, the SSS denies any connection between the plans and current events—citing the ongoing public outreach as “business as usual.”

“This responsibility,” as stated on the SSS website in response to mounting media inquiries and e-mail campaigns “has been ongoing since 1980 and is nothing new. Further, both the President and the Secretary of Defense have stated on more than one occasion that there is no need for a draft for the War on Terrorism or any likely contingency, such as Iraq.”

And yet, in a Feb. 11 statement to senior Pentagon officials, Lewis Brodsky, director of the Selective Service agency suggested that the system’s structure, programs, and activities should be, “re-engineered toward maintaining a national inventory of American men, and for the first time, women, ages 18-34, with an added focus on individuals with critical skills.”

To add fuel to the fire, schools are required to provide the government with contact information for every student, or risk losing federal funds—thanks to a provision in the No Child Left Behind Act.

While Alyce Burton, spokeswoman for the Selective Service confirms that the Pentagon has requested that they design procedures for specific registration that would draft skilled candidates—including doctors, nurses, medical technicians, linguists, and computer programmers, she is quick to add that she has been told “a draft of untrained manpower would not be necessary in the future.”

If a draft is reinstated, many feel the U.S. will be faced with an exodus of candidates looking for a quick change in residence. However, in Dec. 2001, Canada and the U.S. signed a Smart Border Declaration that would make dodging the draft nearly impossible. And with an FBI presence in over 45 countries and official statements from at least 74 foreign ministries regarding extradition of draft dodgers, the decision to choose flight over fight will be more difficult than it was in the 60s.

While no action has yet been taken on H.R. 163 and S. 89, it seems unlikely that any will be taken in the near future. According to Lofgren, who now heads back to work after a summer recess, none will be taken during the current session of Congress.

“I don’t see that a draft is in the cards,” she says.

On Jan. 7, 2003, H.R. 163 was referred to the House Committee on Armed Services. An executive comment was requested from the U.S. Department of Defense on Feb. 3, where it was then referred to the Subcommittee on Armed Services. S. 89 was referred to the Senate Armed Services Committee. To date, no further actions have been recorded for either piece of legislation.

Information on H.R. 163 and S. 89, including the complete text of both bills can be found at http://thomas.loc.gov. For more information on the Selective Service System, log on to www.sss.gov.