In 1948 a new Selective Service act made all men 19 to 26 liable for 21 months service followed by five years Reserve duty. However, with the Korean War came the Universal Military Training and Service Act of 1951, extending service to 24 months, with a minimum age requirement of 18.5.
The Reserve Forces Act of 1955, designed to strengthen the Reserve and the National Guard, required six years total of Reserve and active duty. (The Reserve is a pool of troops who enlist for eight years of combined active and Reserve duty and can be called up in times of national crisis. The National Guard provides trained forces for domestic-and if necessary, national-emergencies or as otherwise required by state law. The National Guard can also be mobilized for war.)
The Military Selective Service Act of 1967 required all men 18 to 26 to register for duty in Vietnam. The draft was a hand-drawing of 366 blue-plastic capsules containing birthdates placed in a large glass jar. Draft resisters in the thousands fled the country or went to prison until 1973, when the draft ended and the US converted to an all-volunteer military. In 1974, President Ford granted clemency to draft resisters. Registration was resumed again in 1980 by President Carter following the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
New draft legislation surfaced on January 7, 2003-in the final weeks before the US invasion of Iraq-when identically worded bills calling for the Universal National Service Act of 2003 were simultaneously proposed to the Senate and Congress. In the Senate, Sen. Ernest "Fritz" Hollings (D-SC) introduced S 89, without cosponsors. He said, "One way to avoid a lot more wars is to institute the draft." Congressman Charles Rangel (D-NY) and five cosponsors introduced HR 163 to the House of Representatives; as of April 2004, Rangel's cosponsors had reached 13. What has become known as the Rangel-Conyers Bill was referred to the Committee on Armed Services, where it is pending. Hollings' spokeswoman, Ilene Zeldin, has admitted the bill is "collecting dust," but Rangel's spokesman, Emile Milne, told Bengal News Online, "Mr. Rangel has had many members [of Congress] support the idea, but it's not something they're prepared to lend their name to politically at this time."
Aside from Hagel, most Republicans view the Rangels-Conyers Bill as a "political stunt," Rep. James C. Greenwood (R-PA) told his local newspaper, the Doylestown Patriot last month. Calling the bill "the tool of liberals to try and frighten people into thinking their children will be pulled into the war on Iraq," Greenwood said "the likelihood, the chance, of a draft being reinstated are a million to one. It's zero. It's not going to happen."
Sen. John Warner (R-VA), who served as President Nixon's Secretary of the Navy during the Vietnam War, agrees. On July 4, he told NBC's "Meet the Press," "I can tell you the all-volunteer forces worked."
Yet Rangel's press secretary Milne says the Rangel-Conyers bill is "something that's captured the attention of many Americans, and continues to do so." This point is underscored by the recent proliferation of media attention to draft speculation-from media stories including a March 13 San Francisco Chronicle article alleging that the Selective Service is secretly creating procedures and policies to conduct a targeted draft of people with skills in computers and foreign languages in case Congress authorizes it, to Web sites like www.stopthedraft.com. After being deluged with phone calls and e-mails from a worried public, even the Selective Service has joined the fray, having posted the following notice on its homepage:
"Notwithstanding recent stories in the news media or on the Internet, Selective Service is not getting ready to conduct a draft for the US Armed Forces. Rather, the agency remains prepared to manage a draft if and when the President and Congress so direct. oth have stated there is no need for a draft."
Relatives of World War I draftees line up in protest in Chicago, 1917.
WHAT ARE WE DRAFTING FOR?
The stated purpose of the Universal National Service Act, aimed at 18- to 26-year-olds, is more idealistic and specific than its predecessor, the Military Selective Service Act of 1967, whose purpose was "to provide for the common defense by increasing the strength of the Armed Forces of the United States, including the reserve components thereof, and for other purposes." The Universal National Service Act's mission is: "To provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes." (Full text is available at http://thomas.loc.gov.)