New bills explore draft possibilities

The draft was done away with more than 30 years ago, but two bills could bring it back, though… The draft was done away with more than 30 years ago, but two bills could bring it back, though not as it departed from military law in 1973. Several new provisions, such as the inclusion of women in the selective service, were proposed in early January of 2003.

Also, the bills mandate that those not selected for military service would be required to fulfill a two-year obligation in a civilian capacity.

Jennifer Victor, an assistant political science professor at Pitt, predicted that it was extremely unlikely for the draft to be enacted again. Referring to the Nixon administration during the Vietnam War, she explained that, because of overwhelming public disapproval, the draft was cast away.

“Either party would get completely trounced if they supported an involuntary draft, because of the strong public opposition.” In addition, both bills have been stagnant since Jan. 7, 2003 when they were referred to committees, according to the Library of Congress Web site.

Victor added that the draft question will have little bearing on the upcoming presidential election, since both Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., and President George W. Bush oppose a new draft.

Then what purpose do these bills play? Victor clarified that sometimes bills proposed during the beginning sessions of a new congress, in this case the 108th congress, may be proposed as symbolic gestures, “and the fact that they never received a hearing, simply referred to committee, just emphasized that they are symbolic gestures rather than real policy makers.”

The House bill, H.R. 163, was introduced by a Democrat from New York, Rep. Charles Rangel, who proposed the bill as a symbolic admonition of the possible consequences of war, rather than an actual legislative proposal, thus arousing public opposition to a war that Rangel believes is unjust, according to his Web site.

The Senate bill, introduced by Sen. Fritz Hollings, D-S.C., was proposed with similar intent, but with one exception. The Senate bill was proposed to draw attention to the issue of the voluntary draft, which, 30 years before, was considered biased, according to Victor.

Titled the Universal National Service Act, the Senate bill attempts to close gaps of gender, economic class and race by adding provisions that would ensure a more equitable group of draftees. Victor said that the two bills were a “natural modernization of a male-only draft that would be viewed by a contemporary public as inequitable.”

During the last active draft period, she explained, a disproportionate number of minorities and lower-income people were drafted because draft-age people who could afford it became draft-dodgers, taking shelter within university halls or crossing borders.

The twin bills include provisions that would prevent draftees from dodging the draft. The reforms aimed at making the draft more equitable also eliminate higher education as a shelter by letting underclassmen postpone service until the end of their current semester, whereas seniors would have until the end of their academic year.

Will the draft ever become a necessity?

“There is a decent amount of evidence that the military is spread too thin,” Victor said. “Service men and women in Iraq are National Guardsmen and reservists not meant for extended overseas service. This speaks volumes about an overextended military.”

Rather than drafting to remedy a shortage, Victor explained, the military should instead transition into more specialized, efficient groups of soldiers.