Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y. wants a draft for Americans between 18-42. Isn't he your guy?
He proposed it in 2003 and intends to push legislation for the draft again. Are you going to line up, libs? Run?
2006-11-20 12:48:43 · 31 answers · asked by Em E 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Here is the article:
Rep. Rangel Will Seek to Reinstate Draft
By JOHN HEILPRIN
The Associated Press
Sunday, November 19, 2006; 4:11 PM
2006-11-20 13:28:54 · update #1
He's just trying to make a point, his proposal will never be passed into legislation.
What a partisan waste of government time.
I do believe that ALL young Americans should serve the country for 2 years either in the military or some other capacity as a pre-requisite for the privilege of attending college. The social ills which plague or society may find some cure with the self respect and discipline that military service teaches along with the healthy dose of the "real world" they would receive.
2006-11-20 12:58:36 · answer #1 · answered by ©2009 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Much like what JFK proposed, Rangel's proposal encompasses many areas of service to our country. Yes, a draft is part of it, but it is by no means ALL of it. It includes things like working in areas that need better security on the homefront, like ports, airports, public transportation systems, and schools. The part of his proposal that has to do with the draft - which he knows will not be passed - is really designed to be more of a statement, in effect, pointing out that, perhaps if more of those in positions of power had to send their sons and daughters into war (and yes, I know that women are exempt from combat), that maybe those people wouldn't have been so quick to support Bush's call to war.
Incidentally, even without an active draft, it is still required that all males between the ages of 18-24 register with the Selective Service. Also, if there ever was a draft, women are exempt.
JFK said, "Ask not what your country can do for YOU - ask what YOU can do for your country". This premise of service gave an entire generation the opportunity to become passionately involved in making our country WORK, both domestically and internationally. It is an idea that transcends party lines, then - and now.
2006-11-20 13:07:51 · answer #2 · answered by happy heathen 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I wouldn't sweat it too much, its mostly political wrangling and has very little substance. Voting for a draft would be political suicide and everyone knows it.
I don't like the idea of a forced service, not conducive to good order and discipline. I do believe that military service is an invaluable experience. I'm prior enlisted and now an officer I'm active duty (and a recruiter to boot).
Jim I didn't know there was such a thing as an EX Marine?
2006-11-20 13:14:43 · answer #3 · answered by jmsm1222 1 · 3⤊ 0⤋
When the legislation was proposed even Rangal voted against it, in fact only two dems voted yes.
I think the reason the draft was proposed was more of a threat to the uppermiddle class and upperclass. The military is made up of moslty poor people who have little other options. The draft would ensure that a cross section of the public was serving in the military, instead of the only the poor. I think it was more of a scare tactic to get people in the upperclasses to realize that their children may be in danger of fighting a war that we don't belong in.
I do not support the reinstatement of the draft and neither do most liberals and Democrats. And it was 18 and 26 not 42
2006-11-20 12:57:03 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
Rep. Rengel is closing in on 80 - I suspect he's no longer the brightest light in the harbor.
I know from interviews from his constituants that he didn't mention this particular aspect of his agenda during his campaign.
As far as "self righteous hypocrits" - I personally joined the service and voluntered for duty in Viet Nam - and, yes, the draft was up and running at the time. But, then again, I'm not a liberal.
2006-11-20 12:57:58 · answer #5 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
How funny. Democrats are caught in their own web. Hypocrites!
We have a healthy all volunteer military. Our heroes are re-enlisting 2 - 3 times to get back into action. Our military is far more motivated because they choose to serve the US. They are the Heroes of the Free World. God Bless the Servicemen!
2006-11-20 14:43:35 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes he does intend to propose this piece of legislation, but it will not pass. None of the Democrats will pass it and most of the Republicans would be against it as well.
2006-11-20 13:00:54 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Is that each and all and sundry you ought to anticipate in existence? summer time stretches forward, with pub barbecues, long evenings and out of doorways eating, yet you're purely waiting for iciness so which you will experience boastful. unhappy bustard are not you!
2016-10-17 07:32:15 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It won't pass. There have been too many who openly opposed this proposal, on both sides of the aisle. Democrats have denounced this move. I haven't heard many Republicans rebuke this idea. Maybe he is closer to being on Bush's side than what was previously believed. A closet Republican possibly.
2006-11-20 16:15:51 · answer #9 · answered by Schona 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Conservative for a draft. 18-42 year old men and women. No exemptions, no deferments. Except for the disabled, depending on the degree because they could fill a supportive role.
2006-11-20 12:55:19 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋