Big news! Representative Charles Rangel of New York, the new Democrat chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, wants to reinstate the draft.
Most people think "draft" is a four-letter word. Actually, I'm not in principle opposed to the idea; a tour in the military is just what many young people need to steady them down before they take the terrifying leap out into the real world.
However, before a draft is reintroduced, I'd like to insist that it be universal in nature. Students who plan to go directly from high-school to college could get one, count them, deferment for a maximum of four years; then they would have to serve (or earlier, if they flunked out). People who claim medical exemptions ... couldn't; the military would be required to find jobs for them to do within the constraints of service. There would be no more five-consecutive-deferments-and-then-never-served individuals who could later become ragingly hawkish vice-presidents and insist that they are more patriotic than those who did serve but fail to support their aims.
The biggest problem with a general draft is that it would provide cannon fodder to every crazed president who got a hair up his hind end and decided to invade some small country to convert it to what we may laughingly describe as "democracy". In fact, the main problem with Congressman Rangel's proposal is his argument justifying it. Rangel says: "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." Well, we knew that our kids from our communities — the ones who had volunteered for military service — were going to be placed in harm's way in Iraq, and that doesn't seem to have stopped anybody from placing them there. Well, maybe if we're talking about the Bush kids and the sons and daughters of senators and congressmen ... but, short of the genuinely universal draft that I suggest above, we all know very well that those kids aren't going to serve; and even with a universal draft, we can be fairly sure that they will be assigned to REMF jobs and never hear a shot fired in anger.
What I see in a draft, with the current administration in power (and lots of potential later administrations, of various political stripes), is the ability to place a lot more kids in harm's way, in a lot of different places at the same time, for the purpose of enforcing some ideological daydream. I think that Rangel can come up with better arguments, if he's willing to work at it; this one just doesn't fly.
Had I been president on September 12, 2001 I would've asked Congress and the American people for three things:
1. A formal declaration of war on Afghanistan.
2. A war tax.
3. A draft.
#1 should be obvious, the Constitution allows only the Congress to declare war.
#2 we were mad after 9/11 and rightfully so. But the military costs a fortune to run. If the American people were determined to defeat terrorism then certainly they'd be willing to fund it.
#3 is to see just how much fortitude our nation has. Is going after bin Laden, Saddam, Jong-il, etc. enough of a priority to send YOUR son or daughter to go do it?
Personally I think we should be more like Switzerland. Everyone joins and maintains readiness, but we use our military to defend our borders.
Posted by: John at November 21, 2006 07:11 AM