Charles Rangel (D-NY) introduced a bill to Congress on Jan. 7 that would reinstate the military draft for Americans between the ages of 18 and 26. The bill would amend current U.S. laws and draft both men and women once out of high school, forcing all who qualify into the military during wartime.
The bill will make people more wary of jumping into a potential war. After Sept. 11, 2001, many people have supported the war effort against terrorism, urging the government and military to take action against those opposing the United States. Rangel believes that if the bill is passed, those who want the United States to go to war will be less inclined to opt for war if their children are the ones fighting. In addition, the bill may lead Congress to think twice before making rash decisions involving military action.
Although this may be seen as a potential benefit, supporters of the bill are overlooking an important fact: There is currently no need for a draft. According to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, the military has more than enough skilled recruits in reserve for a war. Rumsfeld pointed out that training new recruits who are resentful of being drafted would be expensive and unnecessary. Add to that the fact that we are not at war with a technological equal or a nation anywhere close to our size, and it begins to seem ridiculous that our current army of willing recruits cannot handle the situation.
If instituted, 14.1 million men and women would be eligible for the draft, many of whom are currently enrolled in institutes of higher education. Supporters say that removing student deferments, which protect young adults in college from being drafted, will create a more equal representation of U.S. citizens involved in the military and would erase the racial lines previously drawn by the draft.
The military is a well-known employer of minorities using the Montgomery GI Bill to pay their way through college. These minorities make up more than 30 percent of the U.S. military. Rangel wants to target white, upper class citizens - the demographic who make up the majority of those using student deferments.
As he represents the Bronx, Rangel may be catering to the underclass people of his district to increase his popularity. While he will gain the acceptance of those he is aiming to please, the people who are negatively affected by the bill will begin to loathe not just Rangel, but the entire U.S. government as well. Rangel's bill could begin a trend last seen with the Vietnam War, where potential soldiers fled to Canada to avoid the draft because they felt so strongly against a conflict they believed they were not a part of.
Rangel's plan has other flaws. Despite claiming to level the playing field to make everyone equal, the bill continues to divide men and women. The bill states both men and women will have to be drafted during wartime, yet women do not have the full range of options that men have in choosing in which section of the military to serve. Women, for example, are still restricted from areas such as undersea combat and infantry. While the reasons are understandable - separate quarters are difficult to create in confined vehicles such as submarines and female prisoners of war would face an increased risk of rape by their captors - sexual fairness is just as important as racial equality.
Rangel obviously has not thought his plan through. While a good idea in theory, he has not taken into account the people that it will involve, nor those who are voting to pass the bill who most likely have loved ones that will fall into the age bracket he has specified. Rangel may please a few thousand people in the Bronx, but the draft will affect far more in the country outside his district.
Photo: Meredith Forrest Kulwicki
