Draft Coming Back!...18 to 26 year olds...Contact your Representative Now!

[masmdu]

"Universal National Service Act of 2003." Will be voted on in the next few weeks.

The US government has ALREADY BEGUN HIRING PEOPLE TO STAFF THE DRAFT
BOARDS.

Contact your Representatives and tell them to vote agains re-instating the Draft.

The Bills are:

In the House: H.R. 163

In the Senate: S.89

[Emboldened Chimp]

1. FYI, HR 163 is sponsored by Democrats

Supporting H.R.163 the Universal National Service Act of 2003

January 8, 2003

Mr. Speaker:

I am an original cosponsor of the Rangel/Conyers bill, the Universal National Service Act of 2003 (HR 163), which would reinstate a national draft. I would like to explain my support for this legislation. I ardently oppose war with Iraq. The evidence simply does not exist to warrant sending our nation’s young people to sacrifice their lives in Iraq. I believe America ought to be an advocate for peace, not imperialism.

Yet, war is on the horizon. The President is intent on invading Iraq whatever the cost. Thanks to the President’s brand of hotheaded bully diplomacy, war with North Korea may also be imminent. The only real question that remains is whether or not Americans are ready and willing to bear the cost?

http://www.house.gov/stark/documents/108th/univdraftstate.html

Makes one wonder whether or not both sides of the aisle are complicit in our new experiement: Amerikan Empire.

[NashVegas]

2. And Bush Will Be Laughing His Head off If It Passes

.

[bowens43]

3. If this is supported by Dems and opposed by Republicans

I will not be voting for the Dems in 2004.

[alfredo]

19. Rangel and Conyers wanted to bring the war home to the American

people. Rangel and Conyers knew the best way to end the war would be to reactivate a universal draft that would take the rich and the poor equally.

[OneBlueSky]

23. Rangel and Conyers are out of their bleepin' minds . . .

wanna insure Bush's re-selection? . . . just position the Democrats as the ones who are pushing for a draft . . . yeah, that's the ticket! . . . dumb, dumb, dumb . . .

[The Backlash Cometh]

24. Any Democrat who voted to go to Iraq AND approves of this bill

should be kicked out of the party. It's a lousy strategy that is going to backfire on the Democrats. They can't control ANYTHING, once it gets on the Republican agenda.

[LynneSin]

4. I don't think this bill is going anywhere - here are more details!

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:s.00089:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:HR00163:

This is the bill that Rangel and Hollings introduced back last January. Although it's a shocker to see the bill is coming from our side of congress (both are dems), I remember Rangel talking about how this new bill would prevent favoritism and finangling like we saw back during Vietnam (aka - daddy's connecton's to get you into the National Guard like Quayle & Bush). Rangel stated about how the Vietnam draft was unfair to minorities and that the new draft would take everyone equally. Plus he felt that if we were requiring a draft that our government wouldn't be so gung-ho to start wars.

But according to Thomas (congress Bill locator), this thing has been sweltering in Congress since 2/2003

Here is some reasoning behind why Rangel proposed this legisilation:

http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/12/29/mandatory.military/index.html

"When you talk about a war, you're talking about ground troops, you're talking about enlisted people, and they don't come from the kids and members of Congress," he {Rangel} said.

"I think, if we went home and found out that there were families concerned about their kids going off to war, there would be more cautiousness and a more willingness to work with the international community than to say, 'Our way or the highway.' "

So don't go writing off the Dems on this one. I think it's camping out in committee because repukes don't want a draft that would force rich republican contributors to send their kids to war.

[neuvocat]

27. That's what we thought of the California recall.

Something like that is awfully dangerous.

[bif]

5. Gotta have bodies to throw

at the never ending war!

[La_Serpiente]

6. Here are the bills.

House Bill

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=108_cong_bills&docid=f:h163ih.txt

Co-Sponsors

Mr. Rangel, Mr. McDermott, Mr. Conyers, Mr. Lewis of
Georgia, Mr. Stark, and Mr. Abercrombie

GEEZUS---My Rep is on there!!!!

Here is the Senate bill

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=108_cong_bills&docid=f:s89is.txt

Co-Sponsors

Mr. Hollings

[KamaAina]

25. GEEZUS -- My rep is on there, too!

oh, wait a minute, same guy. That'd be Mr. Abercrombie, staunch Iraq war opponent and longtime member of the House Armed Services Committee (an entirely appropriate committee assignment for a rep whose district includes Pearl Harbor, Hickam AFB, and others).

Had I known this, I would have included a few choice words on the little yellow constituent survey I sent back to him a few weeks ago, believe you me!

I understand what they're getting at by pointing out the inequalities inherent in the present system and all that, but the right thing is to make sure NO ONE gets drafted to die for PNAC's power fantasies, not to try to make sure that everyone has an equal chance of dying in vain.

[Emboldened Chimp]

7. Also, Senate Bill 89 is was introduced by Fritz Hollings

http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:sgy7xJdEjcEJ:www.humanunderground.com/archive/pdf/s89.pdf+senate+bill+s.89&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

I really don't know why the Dems are doing this. If it passes, we'll have a draft and the Amerikan Empire will begin for real. If not, the Thugs can use it as political fodder: "See, they want to send your sons and daughters off to die!" It's a lose-lose proposition.

[LynneSin]

11. Dems did it for spite to the Repukes knowing that wouldn't vote for it

Because the bill would require everyone equally available to the draft including the poor kid from the ghetto to the rich kid who's dad contributes millions of dollars to repuke causes.

If you read up on what Rangel said about this bill you'll see he did it to spite the republicans, almost a lark in their faces that war is fought in greater poportions by minorities and the poor; rich kids always very rarely serve whether we draft or it's a voluntary army.

And if you look at the Thomas links I provided above you'll see that this bill has been in committee since Feb 2003. If repukes want a draft you better believe it'll be one that they put together that will give outs to the privledged.

Charles Rangel has been one of the biggest anti-war supporters in Congress. I highly doubt he would put his name on a bill like this unless he knew it would get buried in committee by republicans who are protecting the rich kids.

[Emboldened Chimp]

20. That's true, but...

republicans are notorious for rewriting bills in conference after they've passed; they could very well strip that part out of it and pass off a draft bill to * that exempts the rich kids. I think putting this legislation forward will be extremely dangerous. Of course, they won't act on it until after the election. But it's frightening nontheless.

[Uzybone]

8. Man you guys are so short sighted

this bill will never pass and it only serves as an embarrasment to the warmongers who will never want thier own sons and daughters used as cannon fodder.

[Emboldened Chimp]

9. It's still a losing proposition for the Dems

because the the republicans will use it against them. It'll be more embarassing for our side either way.

[elperromagico]

14. Agreed

The point will be lost on the Faux News crowd, certainly.

I can almost hear it: "Now, not only do the Democrats want to take all your money, but they also want to send your children to die." That kind of simplification always works with the neocons.

[LynneSin]

16. actually - it make republicans look bad

Because here are democrats proposing a draft that drafts everyone as equals. And they can once again say that obviously repukes are out to protect the rich because they wouldn't even consider bringing this bill to the floor. A bill that EQUALLY drafts all in that age bracket.

From what I've read about the bill, if we had this back in Vietnam - Bush and Quayle probably would have been on the front line.

[Loonman]

10. Politics

This is just politics at play.

The Repubs will back down. Just watch.

[Kitsune]

15. And what if they don't?

As an 18-26 year old, I really don't like the idea of taking that chance.

[Loonman]

17. They will

You can bet on it.

No congressional Republican would allow their kids to get drafted.

[LynneSin]

18. We're talking Charles Rangel - the most anti-war proponent in Congress

Believe me, if he thought this thing would make the floor he would have never done it. He knew the repukes would not buy a draft that would put rich children at risk to being drafted into a war.

[alfredo]

22. If the draft started as The Conyers Bill says, you will see another Brooks

Brothers riot. this time they will be demanding an end to the war.

[mmonk]

12. I think they know it probably won't pass

and they are getting Bush voters to look at current foreign policy. Will they support him if they or their children have to go?

[Cocoa]

13. more info on the upcoming vote, please

How do you know it is going to be voted on in the next few weeks.

It seems like there has been no action on this bill in over eight months. I don't completely understand the process, but it seems to me this may never be voted on.

[LynneSin]

21. The bill has been in committee since February 2003

it's not coming up for vote.

Please scroll up and check out my first post on this issue. I have links to both bills.

Anything in committee that long isn't coming to the floor

[mb7588a]

26. I put my reply to this thread on my blog...

I finally got a little upset about this draft idea... Whee! http://www.mbare.org