Why does Charles Rangel want a draft?

[VotefurKerry]

Can someone please tell me why he would author a draft bill?

He should know only poor Democrats would be drafed as cannon fodder.

[gospelized]

1. he did it

to raise awareness of the issue and spark debate.

[951]

21. I believe he is a mole for the RW agenda

After all the best way of passing a draft without protest is by having a democrat propose it. Face it

[diddlysquat]

2. I think he was trying to point that out. n/t

[roughandtumble]

3. to let rich kids die for their country too.

[HEIL PRESIDENT GOD]

11. Like hell they would, though.

The twins wouldn't go. No way. There is always a way for the Bushes and Cheneys of the world to wiggle out of any real challenge or danger.

Welcome to DU!

[aldian159]

20. Too true

Way too true, unfortunately.

All college Republican chapters should immediately fold and all members should willingly enlist, if they love the war as much as they say they do.

[libertad]

13. I heard him say there would be no college deferments this time, but it

still scares me as I have a draft-age "child" who happens to be in college at this time.

[Pepperbelly]

4. he doesn't want a draft.

he filed the Bill during the run-up to the Iraq War in an effort to put at risk the children of rich gops as well as those of poor people.

I haven't seen him pushing it.

[Dems Will Win]

10. Charles Rangel hasn't had a bill come out of committee since '94

It's a protest--and a very dumb strategy. Hollings has a similar bill in the Senate and said even he wouldn't vote for his own bill!

Don't be confused by the Rangel DRAFT PROTEST BILL and the new BUSH SKILLS AND COMBAT DRAFT ACTIVITY that I've been reporting on. It's easy to get mixed up because both would draft women and both would expand the age up to 34 from 25. BUT Rangel's bill is a protest bill and hasn't a PRAYER of passing because it DRAFTS WOMEN for COMBAT.

The GOP hates that idea. Rangel proposed it because he knew it wouldn't pass but it would make it

The NEW BUSH SKILLS DRAFT would only DRAFT women for NON-COMBAT skills job.

They are two different animals.

The SSS secret Issue Paper which was an agenda for a 2003 top-level meeting between the head of the SSS and Deputy Undersecretary Abell in charge of Personnel and Readiness of the DoD, see: http://www.blatanttruth.org/selective_service091304.pdf

It's important that we not mix these up.

Here are the differences between the RANGEL PROTEST BILL and the secretive behind-the-scenes activity at the SSS and the DoD to ready not only a BUSH COMBAT DRAFT in 2005 but also a BUSH SKILLS DRAFT and BUSH MEDICAL DRAFT in 2006 or sooner.

RANGEL PROTEST BILL
http://www.theorator.com/bills108/hr163.html”> Text of bill here

1. Would replace current draft legislation drafting only men for combat, retaining current exemptions such a high school and Conscientious Objector status
   
2. Drafts Women for combat as well as men, ages 18-34
   
3. Does not draft for skills, combat draft only
   

ACTUAL BUSH SSS ACTIVITY TOWARD A 2005 DRAFT

1. Could draft MEN ONLY for combat, 18-25 (Current law)
   
2. "Groundwork being laid" (SSS Spokesman Amon) for a NON-COMBAT SKILLS DRAFT, men and women age 18-34. 2-year process to gear up SKILLS DRAFT started nearly 2 YEARS AGO in Feb. 2003, meaning a skills draft would be ready in 2005. (a new law wuold be passed if Bush gets back in)
   
3. The MEDICAL DRAFT registration data collection is also going to be readied for operational use in 2005 by using the SKILLS DRAFT work they've done and make the reg card you'd fill out at the Post Office contain all the listed medical skills. This means the Medical draft would be ready in 2005, men and women age 20-44. (This draft like the current combat draft for men 18-25, is already the law of the land)
   
4. The secret http://www.blatanttruth.org/selective_service091304.pdf>Issue Paper actually proposes being able to call a SKILLS and MEDICAL DRAFT WITHOUT calling a combat draft.
   

The biggest difference of course is that the RANGEL PROTEST BILL will NEVER happen and the NEW BUSH DRAFT has already begun gearing up for 2005.

SKILLS DRAFT AND NEW COMBAT DRAFT TIMELINE

Feb. 11 2003 - Top-level meeting between the head of the SSS and Deputy Undersecretary Abell in charge of Personnel and Readiness of the DoD on the SKILLS DRAFT. This is the meeting of the secret Issue Paper, revealed by the Freedom of Information Act in May. The SSS goes back encouraged enough to do some more planning.

Summer 2003 - Drive to start filling DRAFT BOARD vacancies by asking current board members to find new ones.

Fall 2003 - DoD announces critical skills shortages in linguists, computer experts and engineers. SSS Director Brodsky orders the designing of the SKILLS DRAFT procedures, the reg card and the massive database needed to track every young American under 35 and their skills. Brodsky, who "plays" JE McNeil and other anti-draft leaders by calling them regularly and shmoozing them, lies to McNeil telling her that in February of 2003 the SSS had to "justify their existence" before a hostile committee--when in reality the SSS and DOD were having the SKILLS DRAFT meeting and he himself had just started designing the new system and making it his top priority.

Sept 2003 - Draft board recruitment ad goes up on Web.

November 2003 - Draft board ad scrubbed!

Dec. 2003 - Brodsky announces the SKILLS DRAFT to be the "top priority' of the SSS in newsletter and tells of rapid progress to come.

March 13, 2004 - Word of SKILLS DRAFT leaks out in a SF Chronicle story and the SSS admits it and tells reporters it’s just a planning contingency. In an attempt to throw the press off, the SSS also says it would take 2 years to gear up and work out the kinks for the SKILLS DRAFT and that there is no funding for it. Eric Rosenberg, the reporter on the story, finds out about the Feb. 11 meeting Issue Paper and files a Freedom of Information Act request to get it.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/03/13/MNG905K1BC1.DTL


May 1, 2004 – Article on SKILLS DRAFT leaves out key points of how skills conscription would be expanded to fill labor shortages throughout Dept of Homeland Security, 1/3 of government, how the SKILLS DRAFT can be called without a combat draft, how SKILLS INDUCTEES will be inducted within a mere 90 days of reauthorization, that the SSS wanted to “promptly” change the very MISSION of the SSS and so on. The article does, however, reveal many major point of sweeping plan. http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/171522_draft01.html

Sept 13, 2004 – Issue Paper agenda memo of key Feb 2003 meeting posted on the Web at http://www.blatanttruth.org/selective_service091304.pdf sample:
"while a conventional draft may never be needed, a draft of men and women possessing these critical skills may be warranted in a future crisis if too few volunteer."

2004 – MOCK DRAFT LOTTERY HELD, SAMPLE MEDICAL EXAM REPORT ORDERS ISSUED TO MAIL LIST. Alternative Service geared up for first time in 31 years! Papers to place Conscientious Objectors with employers actually drawn up. SSS brought up to 95% operational capability, full Medical draft capability set for 2005, all DRAFT BOARD vacancies filled by Spring 2005! On March 31, 2005, the SSS Director must report to the Congress that the entire system is primed and ready to open 2,000 draft board offices and start inducting within 75 days, or June 15, 2005.



Printable pdf: http: http://somnamblst.tripod.com/draftalert.pdf

[Pepperbelly]

14. I hope that you address the Factcheck.org article floating around here.

You have done some impressive work here.

[Dems Will Win]

25. Snopes and the FactCheck just debunked the Adam Stutz e-mail

that went around. THat had 2 little mistakes in it so they said the whole thing was false.

What Stutz mainly confused was that new legislation is needed to call a combat draft when there already is one. Congress only has to OK a 1-page "trigger resolution" and the combat draft for men 18-25 and the medical draft for men and women 20-44 are activated.

Charlie Rangel will have nothing to do with it!

This is new and has never been debunked and never will because all of my sources are the Selective Service themselves.

[CO Liberal]

5. Simple

He wants the legislation on the books that if a draft is instiuted, there will be no loopholes for the rich and the well-connected.

In other words, no George W. Bushes or Dick Cheneys in this generation.

[Cocoa]

6. the opposite, actually

he thinks the draft would be MORE fair, compared to our current military which is made up of mostly poor people.

[DenverDem]

7. He wants to force publican kids into the service.

With stringent controls on bourgeoisie deferrments. Maybe then we can have a more rational foreign policy in this coountry.

[VotefurKerry]

9. I get it

Rich Republicans get drafted and the Chickenhawks don't want war any more.

[The Night Owl]

8. I see where Rangel is coming from, but GOP hacks...

I see where Rangel is coming from regarding the Draft, but GOP hacks, like the idiots at Faux News, are using the Rangel Draft bill to create confusion about what the Bush administration is doing behind the scenes to restart the Draft for real.

[babylonsister]

12. To wake folks up so they see

the possibilities w/this admin in power. Maybe a scare tactic, but food for thought.

[sundeen65]

15. Reasons for draft

A clearly written bill that would eliminate all deferments and require all young people (18-24) to serve their country for at least two years, would go a long way toward putting the brakes on Government leaders jumping into wars for the profit of the rich. If the children of the rich had to serve along with the children of the poor and middle class in this mandatory manner then we could look forward to much more peace.....

[Bran Bal]

19. That's great

So the bush twins will be on the front lines along with the kids of everyone else in the top 1%. That's REALLY going to happen.

Please share whatever you are smoking.

[Bran Bal]

16. It was a poor attempt

to get a draft that the rich and elite couldn't escape.

Of course those who supported it failed to realize that for literally hundreds and thousands of years the rich and elite have ALWAYS managed to escape the front lines if they wanted to. That's not going to change any time soon.

And if anyone truly believes a repub controlled congress is EVER going to let a draft bill pass with out a way for the rich & elite to escape I have only one request for you....

Please PLEASE private message me. I want to tell you about some ocean front property I have for sale...

[Old and In the Way]

17. A volunteer Army, under this administration is a Mercenary Army

While i've always supported a volunteer Army, I'm beginning to think that a true, objective draft might be a better alternative and create the conditions to put a politically higher threshold of pain in place to deploy them.

[Bran Bal]

18. Oh great idea

Now we can get even more of the poor killed for bush's profits.

[BrotherBuzz]

22. Hackworth's words take that thought even further

This dumb draftee found solace in Hackwoth's words after hearing Rumsfeld's "no added value" thoughts on the draft.

-"Even when they pissed me off, I had to admit there was something I liked about the draftees who didn't want to be there and made no bones about it. I like draftees in general, even with the attendant problems. Historically draftees have kept the military on the straight and narrow. By calling a spade a spade, they keep it clean. Without their "careers" to think about, they can't be easily bullied or intimidated as Regulars; their presence prevents the elitism that otherwise might allow a Regular army to become isolated from the values of the country it serves. Draftees are not concerned for the reputation of their employer, the Army (in Vietnam they happily blew the whistle an everything from phony valor awards to the secret bombings of Laos and Cambodia); a draftee, citizens' army, so much a part of the history of America, is an essential part of a healthy democracy, one in which everyone pays the price Of admission." - Col. Davis Hackworth ( from his book About Face)

[lexicon089]

23. thats what he wants

[0007]

24. This doesn't have anything to do with Democrats or Republicans

It is about waking up America to the CRIME FAMILY that is running this country under the name of patriotism and GOD.

What better way is there to get the attenion of mothers and the young university student?

WAKE THE FUCK UP!!

[Tigerlily]

26. kick

Important to clarify this rumor.

[anarchy1999]

27. He believes it will level the playing field and make Republicans

reconsider their war-mongering ways.

If more families are affected then more will care and speak out. Also see post 22 and Hackworth's thoughts.

[Carolina]

28. 1. to make a point

about who does the fighting and dying when there's an all "volunteer" army.

2. To raise awareness about the fact the an unfair draft could return if we continue down the Bush League path

The big problem is I don't think Charlie has thought long and hard about the law(s) of unintended consequences.