New house and senate

[gonefishin]

In addition to the proposed anti-gun laws our new legislators now want to reinstate the draft. Any thoughts?

[Snow Fly]

Never happen! Neither party has the nerve to push this bill out of committee. Probably will never get pass last evening news.

[Thom]

I don't know what news source you are reading but no new member of congress proposed a draft. It was one old legislater who proposed it and it received an immediate and unanimus nooooooo from all of the other congressmen including the new ones that commented on it from both sides of the aisle

His point was maybe if more of the elite of this country were forced to serve their country and not hide in a remote base in Arkansas like Bush or hide behind a Rhodes scholarship in England like Clinton during a war (which is what we are in) our troups would not need to be called up two or three times after their tours of duty were over. I'm not sure if he doesn't have a point.

I agree that there aren't many of the current politician in Washington that would support. None of the ones that face election in the 2008 electionwould except maybe Kerry and he would be for it and then against it later depending on how the wind was blowing.

[LostMyWife]

Here is the story.

Top Democrat: Bring back the draft

POSTED: 6:01 p.m. EST, November 20, 2006

More on CNN TV: Rep. Charles Rangel discusses why he's for the draft in an interview with Wolf Blitzer. Tune in to "The Situation Room" tonight 7 ET.

Adjust font size:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Americans would have to sign up for a new military draft after turning 18 if the incoming chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee has his way.

New York Democratic Rep. Charles Rangel said Sunday he sees his idea as a way to deter politicians from launching wars. He believes a draft would bolster U.S. troop levels that are currently insufficient to cover potential future action in Iran, North Korea and Iraq.

"There's no question in my mind that this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft, and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids from their communities would be placed in harm's way," Rangel said. (Your e-mails on draft)

Rangel, a veteran of the Korean War who has unsuccessfully sponsored legislation on conscription in the past, said he will propose a measure early next year.

In 2003, he proposed a draft covering people age 18 to 26. This year, he offered a plan to mandate military service for men and women between age 18 and 42. It went nowhere in the Republican-led Congress.

Democrats will control the House and Senate come January because of their victories in the November 7 mid-term election.

At a time when some lawmakers are urging the military to send more troops to Iraq, "I don't see how anyone can support the war and not support the draft," said Rangel.

He also proposed a draft in January 2003, before the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican who is a colonel in the U.S. Air Force Standby Reserve, said he agreed that the U.S. does not have enough people in the military.

"I think we can do this with an all-voluntary service, all-voluntary Army, Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy. And if we can't, then we'll look for some other option," said Graham, who is assigned as a reserve judge to the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals.

Rangel and Graham appeared on "Face the Nation" on CBS.

BTW

I was in the last class that faced the draft. My lottery number was 4. I was Viet Nam bound right out of high school.

I am not in favor of the draft, but I would have gone. As a father I worry about my sons being drafted.

I also agree that no matter who controls congress, the draft is DOA.

Reinstating the draft would turn so many democrats into republicans. No way it happens.

[Thom]

You are absolutely right it was Rangle. I couldn't recall his name. I was just making the observation that it wasn't the new congress but a long time member and he has held this position for some time. Of course the press conveniently omited that because it wouldn't have made a good sound bite. caption "top democrat" is also not to acurate because Rangle is a character but his positions seldom get adopted without much compromise and toning down. Actually the new members of the Democratic congress are much more to the center (moderates) and hold political views close to their Republican conterparts. I am taking a wait and see approach to how the new mix works out. Pelosi has already been shown that her far left position is not going to be the direction of the Democratic caucus by the rejection of Murta her choice for majority leader.

Let's give them a chance to function. There will be plenty of time to take pot shot later if they don't make progress on the real issues. remember that during Reagan's final two years a Democratic majority led by Tip O'neal of Mass. who was also a bit bit of a left winger did a great job of working with Raegan to put partisan politics aside and arrive a win/win solutions to the economic recession and recovery.

[Al Agnew]

Another interesting rationalization for a draft that I heard the other day...don't remember who said it...was that an all volunteer military removes the members of the military from the thoughts or concerns of the general populace. In other words, the military is made up of people who voluntarily went into it, and everybody else and their children really have absolutely nothing to do with it. With a draft, EVERYBODY'S kids (not just the politicians' and "elites'" children) would be subject to it, just about everybody would know and be connected to members of the military...and EVERYBODY would therefore be a lot more concerned with how it was used. As it is at present, the military is for all intents and purposes the tool of the politicians, a tool that the people (other than military families) don't really have a stake in.

The draft ain't gonna happen. I'm not saying it SHOULD happen. But there are a few reasons why it might not be a bad idea. And that's not counting the fact that many members of our present military forces are facing their THIRD tour of duty in Iraq.

[McManus]

Rangel has made the point, more than once, that if there is a draft to be instated at the time the Congress supports a president in declaring war, Congress will think twice.

All of those boys---and girls?---of those folks who vote for them, may get shot and killed, because that's what happens in a war. Mamma don't like people shootin' at her baby.----could affect the Congressman's reelection campaign.

[Gavin]

There has been some discussion about reinstating the draft in recent years. I spent six years in the Marine Corp, and its not like it used to be under the draft. What we have now is a professional military thats pretty isolated from the rest of the populace. It's not a citizens army like we had in WWII and Vietnam and I'm not so sure thats the best for our military and our country. I doubt that the draft will come back, but I wouldnt oppose it if it did.

[RAWjohn]

A new draft is not going to happen, though I wouldn't be opposed to it. I was drafted in 1965, served 3 tours in Nam. It helped me grow up, though many were not so lucky.

My oldest son is a 16 year Marine, and has made two tours to Iraq, so far. These men and women need more relief from this duty. The incentives to enlist are good, and the Marine Corp. grows, but not our army.

[Terry Beeson]

I agree that there aren't many of the current politician in Washington that would support. None of the ones that face election in the 2008 electionwould except maybe Kerry and he would be for it and then against it later depending on how the wind was blowing.

I think Kerry indicated he was for being against the draft, but with further information had decided the best course of action would be to be against being for the draft. But then again, I could have taken what he said as something he meant, when in fact he did not mean what he said, but meant what he didn't say even though he was saying what he was not meaning to say but not saying what he was meaning to say...

I think I was just a few months from registering for the draft when it was stopped. Vietnam was over and there was "no need" for a draft. Even at that age, I "argued" that there was still a need for draft registration and even calling up men to service to "fill the gaps" that might occur if the "all volunteer" military did not result in sufficient numbers of troops.

Of course if there is no need for the troops, it does cost money to administer the draft in order to "be ready" when something similar to WWII starts. Are we willing to pay that extra tax?