Rangel to reintroduce notorious draft bill

[RBHam]

by People Against the Draft

Email: contact (nospam) nodraft.info (unverified!)
13 Jan 2005

Rep. Charles Rangel intends to reintroduce legislation calling for resumption of the draft during the current Congressional term.
Rep. Charles Rangel intends to reintroduce legislation calling for resumption of the draft during the current Congressional term, according to a memo circulated by Bill Galvin of the Center on Conscience and War.

Rangel, it will be recalled, was the author of the notorious HR 163, the "universal" conscription bill that became a political football during the 2004 Presidential campaign. When charges that Bush would reinstate the draft emerged as a red-hot election issue last October, HR 163 became a liability for the Kerry campaign -- whereupon Rangel's bill was rushed to the floor and summarily voted down by a huge majority. For tactical reasons even the bill's sponsors, including Rangel, voted against it.

With the election over, the way is clear for politicians on both sides of the aisle to get behind the draft, and Rep. Rangel will likely be leading the charge. According to Galvin's memo, CCW officers were told in a Dec. 21 meeting with Rangel's legislative director, Emile Milne, that Rangel will "probably introduce similar legislation" in the 2005 term.

Rangel continues to argue that conscription would force privileged Americans to share the burden of military service now disproportionately carried by the poor and minorities. He also asserts that future wars would be made less likely by reintroduction of the draft.

more...

http://nyc.indymedia.org/newswire/display_any/138918

[theboss]

1. Rangel must be hell on wheels in a poker room

Because this is a really dangerous bluff he is making.

[GreenPartyVoter]

2. Indeed

----------------------------------------------------------
Save our country one town, county, and state at a time!
http://timeforachange.bluelemur.com/electionreform.htm#why

[liberalnurse]

4. I see it as making a serious point.

The war is slaughtering our volunteer army.....and the press just makes scant reports about it....typical politically-rove-controlled reports......media blackouts of the "real storys of Iraq".

The draft, if re-instated, as I see it, will make it a true American issue....everyone, including females will be on the draft rosters.

[karlrschneider]

5. Ding, Ding! Exactly. It's a call to reality given what Bushco has done.

Charlie doesn't want a draft, he's simply pointing out how badly the chimp has fucked up.

[theboss]

6. So, what happens if the bill passes?

Like I said...a dangerous bluff.

[Kingshakabobo]

8. The republican controlled congress passes the bill and

blames it on the democrats because, after all, they are the ones who introduced it. The repugs get their cannon fodder and we take the heat. The ignorant American voter buys the lie, just like they bought the "Kerry voted against the 87 billion" bullshit.

I don't think it will pass but that's how it could go down if it does pass.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

3. Thank you...

I will be placing this on the desk of a 22 year-old-daddy-wouldn't-let-em-draft-me Repug. LOL I love Fridays!

[hang a left]

7. Correct me if I am wrong but.....

doesn't this bill just expand who will be eligible for a draft presuming that there is one. I don't think it is calling for a draft.

[hang a left]

9. ....

[Sparkly]

10. I can't find this confirmed anyplace else

Where are they getting this information that Rangel intends to reintroduce the legislation -- anybody know?

[hang a left]

11. Where can I read this bill.

I used to have it bookmarked. I want to refresh my memory.

[auburngrad82]

14. here it is

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:HR00163:@@@L&summ2=m&

[hang a left]

16. Thanks.

I read it. It calls for all citizens men and women between the ages of 18-26 to serve for 2 years somewhere, either in the armed forces or homeland security. It gives the president total discretion on whom, how, and where.

I also can't find a news source anywhere. Supposedly there is a memo.

I don't like it at all, and it is not as I remembered.

[Q]

12. This issue is about more than the Draft...

...it's about congress avoiding their Constitutional responsibilities by refusing to vote up or down on a declaration of war and allowing ONE PERSON to decide if there is cause to go to war.

I believe we SHOULD have a draft. It's time that all of America share the burden and sacrifice of war. Perhaps Americans wouldn't support foolhardy and unnecessary adventures like Iraq if they knew their families couldn't escape responsibility?

[outcoldinminn]

13. this isn't going to look like a bluff

it's going to look like democrats are the ones who want the draft, a stupid, dangerous move, when will we learn??

[oc2002]

18. ..exactly..stupid.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

15. Good for Charlie. A draft would bring the war home.

I fought against the draft in the '60s but I now think it was a mistake. With the "all-volunteer" military, the wars and militarism have been given legitimacy. The generals can count on the career soldiers to do their bidding without question. Draftees are a lot less likely to take the shaft with a smile on their faces.

Not to mention the shitstorm reintroducing the draft will bring down upon the government and the military.

[Kitka]

19. Not worth it.

Even one unwilling soldier’s death and/or permanent injury and mental scarring is not worth the political maneuvering you describe.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

21. I certainly agree. And, neither is the victims of the soldiers.

The way to stop the war(s) and the military is to bring the war home to the public who yawn at the deaths of the "enemy" killed by our military. It's all very nice for the average citizen to leave the dirty work to the "professionals" but when it's their kid who has to do it, minds become alert.

[oc2002]

17. Rangel is stupid doing this.

let the Republicans do there own dirty work, its just stupid to give Republicans ammo by introducing this bill.

[Sparkly]

20. I know I'm repeating myself but

I just want to say that I need to see where they're getting this idea of what Rangel "intends" to do before I'll believe it. I'm not sure we should jump to conclusions here.

[JunkYardDogg]

22. Brilliant Tactical Move

Rangel, knowing that a Draft is inevitable, used his 2004 legislation to eventually use against the Rethugs.

1. The first Draft Legislation, during the 2004 Campaign established a record showing the Congressional People who voted against it,
2. After DupeYa's re-election, there must be a draft to replenish the military ranks and provide cannon fodder for the BushReich
3. In a 2005 Draft Legislation vote, MANY Rethugs who are on record as voting against the draft in 2004, will doubtlessly be voting for it in 2005- and this can be used against them in future elections
4. With a Mandatory Draft enacted, this will be the absolutely most effective organizing and Politicizing tool for the College Age (young adult) generation which could happen- Remember VietNam and the '60's- this young generation is so selfish and self-absorbed and protected and insulated from reality, that it has become almost impossible to Politicize them, but that will change real fast when they are forced to Die for the BushReich
Rangel's move is an extremely brilliant tactical move, forcing the Rethugs to put their cards on the table

[LaPera]

23. If the draft were to be reinstalled, it better included women & Gays.

I want to see Bush's daughters get drafted. By not icluding women it would make the draft unfair & sexist. (Maybe that would stop the draft).

And I'd want to see Gay people drafted as well, if there was a draft. The republicans don't want Gay people anywhere in society, the military, the government, or even alive. If republicans excluded Gays, why wouldn't everyone claim to be Gay to avoid Bush's imperialistic wars?

I don't want to see a draft, but if Rangels draft were to be implemented, "to avoid more wars", than it better include everyone, no loop holes for the corporate rich and the repbulican politicans children.

[auburngrad82]

24. There is no way in Hell that any relative of Bush would be drafted

It just won't happen. There will be some kind of exemption that they are elegible for. The people that fight the wars are the ones that can't afford exemptions. Rich people don't fight unless they volunteer.

[LaPera]

25. That's my point, it would have to include everyone or NO DRAFT!

And that would mean college students as well. There can't be ANY loop holes for the rich to weasel their way out of.

I'm quite aware the privileged will try and put in exceptions for their children...Again, that's my point, if they want to reinstall the draft we must insist it include EVERYONE...Or we'll be back to just poor men fighting the fascist wars.

If we are to call them on their bullshit, the draft MUST include everyone.

[cestpaspossible]

26. I think Rangel is right.

And I also don't agree with the assessment that "HR 163 became a liability for the Kerry campaign". I've never seen any evidence that that's so.

[Langley85]

27. No Draft

I have the right not to serve. The government does not have the right to "order" me to enter the military, that is my choice and no one else's. I'm not going, and I don't give a shit what laws they pass about it.