Replies

Saturday, May 1, 2004

Selective Service eyes women's draft

The proposal would also require registration of critical skills

By ERIC ROSENBERG SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER WASHINGTON BUREAU

WASHINGTON -- The chief of the Selective Service System has proposed registering women for the military draft and requiring that young Americans regularly inform the government about whether they have training in niche specialties needed in the armed services.

The proposal, which the agency's acting Director Lewis Brodsky presented to senior Pentagon officials just before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, also seeks to extend the age of draft registration to 34 years old, up from 25.

The Selective Service System plan, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, highlights the extent to which agency officials have planned for an expanded military draft in case the administration and Congress would authorize one in the future.

"In line with today's needs, the Selective Service System's structure, programs and activities should be re-engineered toward maintaining a national inventory of American men and, for the first time, women, ages 18 through 34, with an added focus on identifying individuals with critical skills," the agency said in a Feb. 11, 2003, proposal presented to senior Pentagon officials.

Brodsky and Richard Flahavan, the agency's director of public and congressional affairs, reviewed the six-page proposal with Pentagon officials responsible for personnel issues. They included Charles Abell, principal deputy undersecretary for personnel and readiness, and William Carr, deputy undersecretary for military personnel policy.

The agency officials acknowledged that they would have "to market the concept" of a female draft to Congress, which ultimately would have to authorize such a step.

Dan Amon, a spokesman for the Selective Service System, based in Arlington, Va., said that the Pentagon has taken no action on the proposal to expand draft registration.

"These ideas were only being floated for Department of Defense consideration," Amon said. He described the proposal as "food for thought" for contingency planning.

Navy Lt. Cmdr. Jane Campbell, a spokeswoman for the Defense Department, said the Pentagon "has not agreed to, nor even suggested, a change to Selective Service's current missions."

Nonetheless, Flahavan said the agency has begun designing procedures for a targeted registration and draft of people with computer and language skills, in case military officials and Congress authorize it.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Air Force Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, say they oppose a revival of the military draft, last used in 1973 as the American commitment in Vietnam waned, beginning the era of the all-volunteer force.

Mandatory registration for the draft was suspended in 1975 but was resumed in 1980 by President Carter after the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. About 13.5 million men, ages 18 to 25, currently are registered with the Selective Service.

"I don't know anyone in the executive branch of the government who believes that it would be appropriate or necessary to reinstitute the draft," Rumsfeld said last month.

At present, the Selective Service is authorized to register only young men and they are not required to inform the government about any professional skills. Separately, the agency has in place a special registration system to draft health care personnel in more than 60 specialties into the military if necessary in a crisis.

Some of the skill areas where the armed forces are facing "critical shortages" include linguists and computer specialists, the agency said. Americans would then be required to regularly update the agency on their skills until they reach age 35.

Individuals proficient in more than one critical skill would list the skill in which they have the greatest degree of competency.

------------------------------------------

[John Leland 1789]

May 17, 2005

SUBJECT: SELECTIVE SERVICE/DRAFT/ETC. FOR FEMALES (AND OUR SONS)

Dear Elected Representatives

This letter concerns my children and selective service and any possible future draft for military service:

First, I have attached an article entitled Selective Service eyes women’s draft, by Eric Rosemberg, Seattle Post—Intelligencer Washington Bureau. Please read that article and respond. This letter expresses our position, and asks for your assistance for future use, please.

We have four daughters, ages 25, 20, 8 and 3. We are independent Bible-literalist Baptists. We not only believe that women should not serve in combat roles, but we believe that our older women are to teach our younger women “to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands [or fathers, if single], that the word of God be not blasphemed.” (New Testament, Titus 2:3:5; 1 Corinthians 7:25-40; etc.)

We stand opposed to American women being required to register for selective service, and we are asking you to oppose this in your official capacity.

Summarily, we firmly hold:

1. Our women are not to serve in combat; 2. Our women are to be subject to their own husbands (or fathers, if single); 3. Our women are in violation of the Scriptures to serve under the headship of other men, or even other women outside of the home; 4. Our women, therefore, are not to serve in either military service or in alternative forms of service that are not under the direct headship of their own husbands (or fathers, if single).

According to the Selective Service Administration’s Internet web site, Conscientious Objector (CO) status would require an alternative form of service. And we see that there is talk of requiring the registration of females for selective service. So, we request your assistance in providing a way for us to establish Conscientious Objector (CO) status for our women, which would also allow exemption from any alternative form of service that is not under the direct headship of (obedience to) their own husbands (or fathers, if single), thus allowing them to practice, and not compromise, their Biblical Christian Faith.

We realize that you will think, “Why worry about this now, since there is not yet a requirement for females to register?” The operative words, however, are “not yet.” We, nonetheless, must presently consider the possibility of such registration being made a requirement at some point prior to our 3 year-old becoming a 34 year-old. And that leaves 31 years to the possibility of our daughter, __________, being “required” to register. That still leaves 26 years to the possibility of our daughter, ___________, being “required” to register. That leaves 14 years to the possibility of our daughter, ____________, being “required” to register. That leaves 9 years to the possibility of our daughter, ____________, being “required” to register.

Now, let me mention also that I have two sons, ages 28 and 13. We stand opposed to any re-instatement of a military draft. We are opposed to our sons serving in the regular armed forces for the following reasons:

1. If our sons serve in today’s US armed forces, they will likely be forced to serve with females, and if they progress through military rank, they will most likely have to serve over females, who should, Biblically, be only under the headship of, and obedient to, their own husbands.

2. If our sons serve in today’s US armed forces, they will, in all likelihood, be forced to serve among females who live indiscreet and unchaste lives, increasing temptation to evil, or be forced to tacitly condone (merely turn the head from) wicked and immoral behavior. (I can say this as an eyewitness, having served in the regular US Air Force from 1973 to 1979, and as having served as an non-commissioned officer in security police squadrons and civil engineering structural shops where there were female airmen serving under my supervision).

3. If our sons serve in today’s US armed Forces, they will, in all likelihood, be forced to serve with sodomites (some people call them homosexuals), as any stand against sodomites in the armed forces has all but disintegrated.

You should understand that we are not opposed to taking up arms to defend our nation. Even our women are encouraged to be proficient in firearms, and to be willing to fire at any enemy “through the kitchen window” if necessary. We are willing to fight and even to give up our lives in the defense of our beloved County. Our objections are very specific regarding the affects that females serving in the armed forces (or in alternative forms of service) have upon our Christian homes and families. Our objections involve the affect of current policy on the morality of our sons as well. We view current anti-Biblical social policy, as it is imposed in our military ranks, to be very threatening to the spiritual and moral wellbeing of our young people.

We firmly believe that our Nation’s ills during these generations are directly attributable to our surrendering up of Biblical Christian standards and convictions in our homes, in our places of work and in our government. It is evident to us that the God of our fathers is withdrawing His great hand of protection and blessing to the same degree that we ignore and shun His words in the Scriptures. Those of us who still believe the Bible literally as our final authority are now the ones looked at as odd and unreasonable. Nevertheless, our convictions, in the matters presented herein, and all other issues shall remain of the Bible-literalist position.

We anxiously await your reply, and your action on this matter.

Respectfully,

[John Leland 1789]

Cc: US President George W. Bush Cc: US Senator Richard Lugar Cc: US Senator Evan Bayh Cc: US Congressman Mike Sodrel Cc: US Selective Service Administration Cc: US Secretary of Defense Donald Romsfeld

------------------------------

SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM National Headquarters/Arlington, Virginia 22209-2425 http://www.sss.gov

July 18, 2005

Dear [John Leland 1789]:

This is in reply to your letter of May 17, 2005, opposing reinstatement of any military draft, the registration and conscription of females, and endorsing conscientious objector status for females. Notwithstanding what the media are claiming or what alarming statements are found on the Internet, here are the facts.

Both President Bush and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld have indicated more than once that there is no need to reinstate conscription (a draft). There has not been a draft in over 32 years. Rather than maintain large conscripted Armed Forces, the national military strategy calls for an all-volunteer force of active duty personnel, reinforced with volunteer National Guard and Reserves, and backed up further by the Selective Service System with peacetime registration of 18-year-old males. This tiered approach to national security is supported by the Department of Defense, the U.S. Congress, the public, and America’s young men.

To reestablish a future draft, the Congress would have to amend the Military Selective Service Act and the President would have to sign the proposed legislation. Thus, any change in present national policy would involve both the Legislative and the Executive Branches of the Federal Government. There is no consensus in the Congress to reinstate any type of draft.

You express your concern that women are about to be included in the Federal registration requirement and will be included in any future draft. The facts are that only males are subject to the draft. This policy might be considered discriminatory by some, but it is mandated by law and has been upheld by the Supreme Court. Historically, the Congress has never included women in past military drafts. Current law refers specifically to “male persons” who must register and be subject to a draft. In order for women to be included, Congress would have to change the Military Selective Service Act. When President Carter reinstated the registration requirement in 1980, the Senate maintained a System which excludes women from the draft. The matter was never brought to a vote in the House. After registration was reinstated in 1980, the question of whether women should be required to register was tested in the courts. A Supreme Court decision on June 25, 1981, held that registering men only did not violate the due process clause of the Constitution. In 1994, President Clinton directed the Department of Defense to conduct a review of existing policies regarding conscription, including the question of whether women should be required to register. It was determined then that because existing policy excludes women from front-line ground combat assignments, that it is still not necessary to register or draft women. There is no consensus in the Congress to amend the law to include women in either registration or a future draft.

Finally, under the Military Selective Service Act, classification as a conscientious objector (CO) can only be made by a Selective Service Local Board; there is no provision for a self-designation. Further, classifications would only take place if a draft were underway because presently there are no active draft boards in existence or any type of claim being decided. However, upon reinstatement of a draft, all individuals who receive a notice to report for induction have an opportunity at that time to file a claim for reclassification, postponement, or exemption, to include conscientious objection. Our boards are made up of individual volunteers who are nominated by the State Governor and appointed by the Director of Selective Service on behalf of the President. These uncompensated civilian men and women are from the area covered by the board and are reflective ethnically of the geographic region they serve. The document that describes all claims and the procedures to file for each, our Information for Registration booklet can be found at , under publications and then under registration materials.

Thank you for your views. If we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact the Office of Public and Intergovernmental Affairs at the above address. Our telephone number is (703) 605-4100.

Sincerely, (signed) Richard S. Flahavan Associate Director for Public & Intergovernmental Affairs

-----------------------------------

United States Senate

Washington, DC 20510-1404

July 20, 2005

Dear [John Leland 1789]:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the prospects for a military draft. I appreciate your thoughts and share your concerns.

As you may know, legislation regarding the possibility of a military draft was proposed in the 108th Congress. This legislation, H.R. 163 and titled The Universal National Service Act of 2003, would have required every citizen, and every other person residing in the United States between the ages of 18 and 26, to perform a two year period of national service unless exempted. This national service would be performed either as a member of an active or reserve component of the armed forces or in a civilian capacity that promotes national defense.

H.R. 163 failed to pass in the House by a vote of 2-402. Companion legislation in the Senate, S. 89, never made it out of the Senate Armed Forces Committee. No new legislation of this type has been introduced in the 109th Congress.

You may be interested to know that in November 2001, Senator John McCain and I introduced the “Call to Service Act” in an attempt to harness the spirit and overwhelming patriotism of our citizens after September 11. This bill aimed to give concrete opportunities to countless Americans who were asking what they could give back to their country. Though the full legislation was never passed, President Bush did sign into law our “citizen soldier” option. This short-term military enlistment program enables volunteers to sign up for 18 months of service on active duty, followed by service in the Reserves and then either a period of availability in the Individual Ready Reserves or civilian service in AmeriCorps or the Peace Corps. I am proud of this accomplishment and even more proud of the American people that continue to serve the nation during these challenging times.

Again, thank you for contacting me. I hope that the information I have provided is helpful. My website, http://bayh.senate,gov, can provide additional details about legislation and state projects, and you can also sign up to receive my monthly newsletter, The Bayh Bulletin, by clicking on the link at the top of my homepage. I value your input and hope you will continue to keep me informed of issues important to you.

Best wishes,

(Signed)

Evan Bayh United States Senator

EB/12