While there was some media coverage of Rangel's initiative prior to the formal introduction of the bill, there has been a deafening silence: since February 2006, not a single article or editorial has appeared in print on the Universal National Service Act of 2006.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.R.4752.IH:
HR 4752 or The Draft will apply to all persons in the United States, including women, between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform a [two year] period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes."
The bill applies to both US citizens and non-citizens, to men and women. There does not appear to be a provision which would exempt women who are pregnant and/or caring for infants/children in a young age.
2006-10-24 06:16:30 · 9 answers · asked by rcabrave 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Civic Participation
That is amazing. I have never heard of this bill. I don't know why the media is not reporting on such a life changing bill for all of us.
I'm glad you put this question out there. I hope enough people read it and realize what a really big issue this is. I guess this is how they plan to get around the draft. They'll just re-name it Universal National Service and it won't be a lottery anymore because everyone will get called to service.
2006-10-24 06:37:11 · answer #1 · answered by BParker 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Rep Charles Rangel (D-NY) introduced this bill in 2005 and in 2006 for the sole purpose of claiming it existed. There has be no action at all on the bill in either year. 19 Democrats tried the same thing during the 2004 Presidential election. The Republicans finally forced a vote just to shut them up. 17 of the 19 co-sponsors voted against it, along with every other member of the house. This bill was never intended to be debate, let alone passed. The text of the bill doesn't matter since it will never get out of committee.
2006-10-24 22:37:13 · answer #2 · answered by STEVEN F 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
For the simple reason if everyone knew that they were trying to pass a law like this they'd scream bloody murder, I'm under the age of 42, but i'd bet a 100$ I wouldn't pass the mental exam :) They can Kiss my white A$$ There hasn't been a war in the US or oversea's worth me fighting in except the civil war and it's Longgggggg gone, They call it Homeland security, why the hell are all our troops oversea's?
2006-10-24 13:35:54 · answer #3 · answered by Ray D 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I agree with the premise of the Bill. EVERYONE should contribute 'something' to the defense of our country. The only reason the military is opposed to the draft is because then they'd have to deal with those 'less desireable' members of our society.
"No man is entitled to the blessings of freedom unless he be vigilant in its preservation." -- Gen Douglas MacArthur.
2006-10-24 13:45:09 · answer #4 · answered by et_hates_agame035a 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Some Democrats proposed it. No one, including the military, wants it.
I've heard of it, so I assume it was reported somewhere.
2006-10-24 13:25:37 · answer #5 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Probably because it's dead. No one wants a Draft INCLUDING THE MILITARY!!!
It was a ploy to get a debate started, and it failed miserably.
2006-10-24 13:30:33 · answer #6 · answered by jooker 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Nice, the republicans at it again?? And hiding it to boot!
Not surprising...
2006-10-24 13:24:50 · answer #7 · answered by fairly smart 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
So? You afraid to fight and die for your President?
2006-10-24 14:12:13 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
sounds good to me.
2006-10-24 14:30:49 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋