Senior Democrat renews call for draft

[tmgs]

This Can't be true this soon after the Democrats take control?

http://tinyurl.com/ymzc5e


But, could this be the get out of the draft card?

"Rangel said his legislation on the draft would also offer the alternative of a couple of years of public service with educational benefits."

[Gino]

From the article "Rangel, who opposed the 2003 invasion of Iraq, also said he did not think the United States would have invaded Iraq if the children of members of Congress were sent to fight. He has said the U.S. fighting force is comprised disproportionately of people from low-income families and minorities."

I can't stand it when these guys pull the race/privlidge card!

What difference does the "disproportionately" make? This is a VOLUNTEER service and should be maintained as such - I don't think a "draft" would have curtailed any decision that Bush made.

[dshealey]

From the article "Rangel, who opposed the 2003 invasion of Iraq, also said he did not think the United States would have invaded Iraq if the children of members of Congress were sent to fight. -------------.

Who believes children of Congress would ever be drafted? Not me. They may get a notice, but you can be sure it would be "taken care of".

[George_S]

I wouldn't get too excited about Rangel's proposing a draft. He's done this for at least the past 3 years (attempt to introduce draft legislation). He knows it would be political suicide for anyone to endorse his bill or vote for it. This is his way of trying to draw attention to what he perceives as a disproportionate number of lower economical standing youths who are joining the military (he cites minorities too) and, as such, are suffering and dying.

While I've always disagreed with his views on a lot of issues, if this dialogue and/or the possibility of a draft scares so many politicians that they are prevented from sending our youth to die in a future war where we have no national interest, I'm all for it this time!

And besides, his draft proposal gives the kids a choice- either military service, hospital service, or work in some other areas. And in return they get education credits from the gub'ment. Not entirely a bad idea, IMO.

[usmctpdog]

I agree with Rangel and believe there should be a draft.....

*Nothing is Free in life and your liberty is no different..

[DaveDragon]

I think Mr Bush should lead by example and pick up a gun, like the rest of us did!

I know, I must be high to even conceive of such an idea but think of the affect it would have, positive or negative.

[tmgs]

From the article "Rangel, who opposed the 2003 invasion of Iraq, also said he did not think the United States would have invaded Iraq if the children of members of Congress were sent to fight. He has said the U.S. fighting force is comprised disproportionately of people from low-income families and minorities."

I can't stand it when these guys pull the race/privlidge card!

What difference does the "disproportionately" make? This is a VOLUNTEER service and should be maintained as such - I don't think a "draft" would have curtailed any decision that Bush made.


I agree, I love the low income he threw into the mix, I'm surprised he just did not add uneducated

I have come to realize some folks can't stand the lower income or uneducated crowd though.

Saddening.

Tom

[tmgs]

I agree with Rangel and believe there should be a draft.....

*Nothing is Free in life and your liberty is no different..

then there should be no way to opt out, it should be for everyone period, no more BS about college or any community service and not to matter who your daddy is at all

make it like (Sweden is it?) every male serves so long regardless

[BLBantz]

I have met Cong. Rangel on several occasions. One of my responsibilities during my last term of employment was to provide special services to people like him and several other politicos and "white house want-a-be's". He gave what we called a "seminar" for the office staff where he discussed whatever he wanted to. Employees could ask questions. He was completely incoherent. He rambled alot. He made no sense. On the subject of the draft he seemed to think that it was all about racism and didn't seem to understand that we had an all volunteer military. I don't know, but if people like him are to be in control of our country, we are in trouble. The good news is that Pelosi and most all other Democrats denounced his draft plan today.

[midwilshire]

I agree, I love the low income he threw into the mix, I'm surprised he just did not add uneducated

I have come to realize some folks can't stand the lower income or uneducated crowd though.

Saddening.

Tom

I think an overwhelming percentage of those who serve are from lower income and less-educated families. It was true for me. It was true for those with whom I served.

I think Rangel's saying that this tendency is unjust and should be corrected - that everyone should share equal burdens for the equal rights and equal freedoms they enjoy.

Not an entirely meritless position, is it?

[vernvernvern]

I agree with Rangel and believe there should be a draft.....

*Nothing is Free in life and your liberty is no different..

I have to agree!

[early1]

I think an overwhelming percentage of those who serve are from lower income and less-educated families. It was true for me. It was true for those with whom I served.

I think Rangel's saying that this tendency is unjust and should be corrected - that everyone should share equal burdens for the equal rights and equal freedoms they enjoy.

Not an entirely meritless position, is it?
--VOLUNTEER.
After all, this is an ENTIRELY volunteer force.
Besides the concept of the poor and unintelligent as the only ones volunteering is GROSSLY in error .(As is the concept of them being misled into joining.)

That having been said, I would be in favor of mandatory service to this country, whether that be military, peace corp, work corp etc.

The really sad part of Rangel's verbiage is that his angle is truly trying to increase anti-military feelings and has no real intention of getting a draft re-instated, just old fashioned politics without regard to the detriment of our service people our our country.

[midwilshire]

THEN DON'T ... VOLUNTEER.
After all, this is an ENTIRELY volunteer force.
The underlying idea is that the life-opportunities for poor kids with bad grades are fewer than those available to wealthy kids with Congressmen for parents. One choice that remains open to all is volunteer military service, which, these days, is inherently dangerous (and, hence, unpopular).

Now consider the non-military options for the poor v. the guilded: the former can volunteer for slave labor at the local McDonald's, while the latter can volunteer to chase women around the Harvard campus. It's just a plain fact of life that not everyone can volunteer to be a college student.

The disparity in alternative options gives the decision to volunteer for military service a very different flavor, depending on one's socioeconomic heritage. It seems to me that the composition of the rank & file, predictably, reflects this difference.

This is the inequity to which Rangel alludes. He suggests that the guilded should, nevertheless, bear the burdens otherwise born predominantly by the poor.

[hschisler]

I would have no problem with having a national military service requirement for all citizens -- male & female -- without exception or exemption (except, perhaps, extreme physical or mental incapacity). Make it 2-3-4 years, whatever makes sense; perhaps starting right after high school. In 2 or 3 generations I believe we, as a nation, would recognize our more mature, responsible, and disciplined younger generations as a national treasure.

Does Israel do this already?

And for the record, I'm no congressman and my children should be included.

[kevincook]

Rangel did the same thing in 2004 and the republicans actually brought the bill to the floor for a vote. It was shot down 402 to 2.....even Rangel voted against his own bill :confused: :confused: :confused:

I can't see having the government conscripting people to ensure their freedom....something doesn't seem right there. I respect and honor all veterans for their service, I think they are often forgotten. When this country is attacked we will respond to defend it there is no need for a draft. After Pearl Harbor and again after 9/11 there were plenty of volunteers. I seriously looked at what I could do to help after 9/11 but apparently nobody wants an old geezer......37 at the time. Not even the CIA or NSA :(

We have 35,000 troops in Japan, 32,000 troops in South Korea and over 100,000 troops in Europe including over 75,000 in Germany. These countries can defend themselves. Let their citizens protect their own countries. I'm sure we could find 200,000 troops around the world that are protecting other countries and we have been there for decades. Those countries should pay for their own protection.

We have half the military troops we did in Gulf War I....it isn't because there were no volunteers it is because of intentional cuts in the military.

On a different subject....we send our kids to fight because of their ability to endure the hardships of war but I would rather see us send 35-45 year olds to fight. They could keep us going with all the latest drugs and steroids. It would certainly create all kinds of health problems but I'd rather do that than send 18 year old kids to fight.

Enough ranting,
Kevin

God Bless America
BTW, who is still flying a flag?

[kevincook]

The poor and minorities are not disproportionately fighting for our freedom. Take a look at the report below. The data indicates that the current enlistees are better educated and wealthier than the general population. The rate of enlistment has only dropped for one group.....the poor :rolleyes:

Don't anyone confuse Rangel with the facts though :D


http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/cda06-09.cfm

Kevin

[Dick]

I can only fly our flag by daylight, and I do - everyday! My neighbor flies his 24/365, butt he has it spotlighted.

[desertlizard]

The underlying idea is that the life-opportunities for poor kids with bad grades are fewer than those available to wealthy kids with Congressmen for parents. One choice that remains open to all is volunteer military service, which, these days, is inherently dangerous (and, hence, unpopular).

Now consider the non-military options for the poor v. the guilded: the former can volunteer for slave labor at the local McDonald's, while the latter can volunteer to chase women around the Harvard campus. It's just a plain fact of life that not everyone can volunteer to be a college student.

The disparity in alternative options gives the decision to volunteer for military service a very different flavor, depending on one's socioeconomic heritage. It seems to me that the composition of the rank & file, predictably, reflects this difference.

This is the inequity to which Rangel alludes. He suggests that the guilded should, nevertheless, bear the burdens otherwise born predominantly by the poor.

To add to this, a big draw for the military is the chance to get a college education. For some, this is one of the few ways to pay for that. Volunteering is not always as clear cut as the word. I used to go to "volunteer" hockey practices. If you really expected to play it wasn't really a choice unless you were one of the few exceptional ones. We have had what some call an economic draft for some time. And Ed, I don't know where you got unintelligent. Unless you associate poor with unintelligent, which I don't. Uneducated does not equal unintelligent.

Dale White

[KMC1]

Wow. This guy (Democratic Rep. Charles Rangel) isn't the sharpest tool in the shed, is he?

Sorry for any confusion.

[TandemCyclist]

I guess I've been listening to people like Rangel to long. The way I see his point is if everyone had to sacrifice a child (young adult) the politicians in charge might "THINK" before making a dumb ass move.

Are they really spending 4 billion dollars on advertising for a $15K job that might get you killed. I say have a war tax and increase the wages to the troops to at least the average for the country. I would pay a little more in taxes to give a person in the military in a combat zone $50K a year. You want to support the troops. Put your money where your mouth is. The people that come home with no legs should not have to worry about a thing, $ wise, for the rest of there life, but most of us are just worried about a tax increase.

[desertlizard]

Ouch. Was that directed at me? Does a having a different opinion make me stupid? What do you disagree with? Discuss. ; )

Dale White

[KMC1]

Sorry for any confusion. My post was NOT directed towards you. In fact, I agree with much of what you stated. :beer:

[desertlizard]

No problem. I'll give Rangel one thing, he has people talking about it.

Dale White

[pjessen]

I favor the draft in principal...a draft without exemptions. It will never happen until or unless this country suffers much unheard of trauma.

The Vietnam era was truly a war fueled by the drafted bodies of the poor. Blacks, hispanics and whites. See the serviceman's memorial statue at the "wall" in DC. It represents the culture that actually fought the war.

A repeat of that type of draft would generate a real revolution in this country...at least it should. It was totally unfair. There were also a heck of a lot of good guys that volunteered in Vietnam, too. They were from every strata of the society. They were good. The standard 20/80 rule applied. Many of the drafted troops were unmotived, uninspired, and undiciplined. Today they are sitting on the couch and "hangin out".

What we have now is a damn good armed service. The reenlistment rate is fantastic considering what the services are up against. I recommend giving them more incentives to enlist and reenlist...then use them sparingly!

[midwilshire]

Take a look at the report below. The data indicates that the current enlistees are better educated and wealthier than the general population.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/cda06-09.cfm

Do not believe blindly in the written word. Read carefully and you'll see that paragraph 11 relates this gem of numerical perspicacity:

The Department of Defense (DOD) does not track family
income data for recruits, and there are no individual income
data for enlistees... We approximate each recruit’s household
income by using the median household income of his or her
hometown ZIP code.

How wide is the income spectrum in your zip code? Do you have well-to-do folks living a few short miles or across a certain street from the less-well-off? Most places do. Yet, this "report" makes no differentiation between the two. San Francisco ranks 5th highest in the US for 2005 income. Nevertheless, I'll encounter plenty of poor people on my walk to the train station tonight.

I submit that no teenager bases his life-path decisions on how his zip code pairs up against some ethereal national average. I think it much more likely that he or she just looks around the neighborhood, sees that the Johnsons have a Mercedes in the driveway, the Hamiltons have a Lexus, and his family has merely a rusty Pinto. Do we expect this young person to rush off to the Yale admissions website or over to the Navy recuiters?

And is the Heritage Institute neutral in this discussion? No, they write this "report" in direct opposition to Rangel, and their avowed mission is to "formulate and promote conservative public policies."

[early1]

To add to this, a big draw for the military is the chance to get a college education. For some, this is one of the few ways to pay for that. Volunteering is not always as clear cut as the word. I used to go to "volunteer" hockey practices. If you really expected to play it wasn't really a choice unless you were one of the few exceptional ones. We have had what some call an economic draft for some time. And Ed, I don't know where you got unintelligent. Unless you associate poor with unintelligent, which I don't. Uneducated does not equal unintelligent.

Dale White
Volunteering to play hockey is about as relevant to volunteering to go in the military as volunteering to jump into the swimming pool is to jumping off Niagara falls.
It doesn't take a 140 IQ to see the difference.

The numbers of kids entering from middle and upperclass class income homes would obviously surprise you.
There is no economic draft .
People make choices.
One decides to work, go to school, be a bum, enter the military, live off someone else, etc --based upon ones own values and life plan. Not because some expensive add campaign misled you into a "bad" decision.
AS to the unintelligent aspect ,the implication from Mr. Rangel, Mr. Kerry and others has been quite clear in directing to that perspective.
The words- uneducated, confused, unable to make good decisions etc ,etc. imply a lack of intelligence and lack of ability.
Frankly, I'm tired of the innuendos, half statements, disguised comments and agendas.

I am on the other hand proud of our service people and in general if you ask them ,they are disgusted with the negative commentaries by the individuals previously listed as well as by the media.

(It might also surprise you to look at the high number of Marines and Rangers from Texas.)

[tmgs]

I think an overwhelming percentage of those who serve are from lower income and less-educated families. It was true for me. It was true for those with whom I served.

I think Rangel's saying that this tendency is unjust and should be corrected - that everyone should share equal burdens for the equal rights and equal freedoms they enjoy.

Not an entirely meritless position, is it?

then that is what he should say, what he is doing is stirring the pot to turn more against the issues of the middle east IMHO, which there is nothing wrong with mind you.

But he is doing it with poor taste buy throwing in a mix of minority and low income which is merely trying to get sympathy from a particular group of voters instead of informing that group there are options out there.

Why not tell all hey your kid has a choice!
Get a education there are a ton of free ways to get a education if you would just try your best to get your kid to keep a decent GPA in high School

[tmgs]

The underlying idea is that the life-opportunities for poor kids with bad grades are fewer than those available to wealthy kids with Congressmen for parents. One choice that remains open to all is volunteer military service, which, these days, is inherently dangerous (and, hence, unpopular).

Now consider the non-military options for the poor v. the guilded: the former can volunteer for slave labor at the local McDonald's, while the latter can volunteer to chase women around the Harvard campus. It's just a plain fact of life that not everyone can volunteer to be a college student.

The disparity in alternative options gives the decision to volunteer for military service a very different flavor, depending on one's socioeconomic heritage. It seems to me that the composition of the rank & file, predictably, reflects this difference.

This is the inequity to which Rangel alludes. He suggests that the guilded should, nevertheless, bear the burdens otherwise born predominantly by the poor.

This day in age there is no reason for any younger generation NOT to get a decent education. My daughter for instance got on a full scholarship program merely by keeping good grades in high school, some states offer free college to any state college merely by keeping a GPA (some starting at 3.0 ) 3.5 in GA. gets 100% tuition including your books and fees.

So where is the problem for the poor to become educated?

If the parents help the kids to realize they need a decent GPA during H.S. even if they do not get FULL scholarships do you have ANY idea how many grants there are out there for kids to go straight from high school to college? TONS!!!!

we have one friend she had 6 kids one of her kids went to FIT to become a pilot under full grants YES GRANTS not student loans, She is a RN which does not make too bad of a living and gets a GOOD child support check every month. and they still qualified for the grants because her income was not to high.

Then lets say the family income is too high, yet not enough to pay for college, there are student loans available to just about anyone that makes college after exhausting all the grants out there. (it really does not take to high of a income to not be able to get some grants or on some programs for free college)

Tom

[rixchard]

Stand Back! Ed and I agree. I think a draft and mandatory service is a good idea.

[BillyOmaha]

Who believes children of Congress would ever be drafted? Not me. They may get a notice, but you can be sure it would be "taken care of".Howdy David,

I detect a note of cynism ;)

Maybe it's just me, but I have been quite surprised by the number of politicians that have been in the military, including those that came from wealthy families.

Some of the more famous, Rangel, Kerry, Bush 43, Bush 41, McCain, Murtha, Rumsfeld along with a pretty good number, including the incoming class, that aren't as well known...yet.

I know that some will dismiss members of the list for one reason or another, but they all served and have my respect for doing so.

.

[dshealey]

Howdy David,

I detect a note of cynism ;)

Maybe it's just me, but I have been quite surprised by the number of politicians that have been in the military, including those that came from wealthy families.

Some of the more famous, Rangel, Kerry, Bush 43, Bush 41, McCain, Murtha, Rumsfeld along with a pretty good number, including the incoming class, that aren't as well known...yet.

I know that some will dismiss members of the list for one reason or another, but they all served and have my respect for doing so.

.

Just because they served is no reason they want their children to. Some will no doubt, but many, if their child asked them to, would find some way to get the draft notice dismissed to keep the child home rather than have them go to Canada. :D

[George_S]

Then lets say the family income is too high, yet not enough to pay for college, there are student loans available to just about anyone that makes college after exhausting all the grants out there. (it really does not take to high of a income to not be able to get some grants or on some programs for free college)

Tom

Tom,
The student loans available don't come anywhere near the cost of a private institution. The poor and the wealthy have a more wide-ranging choice of schools than the middle class, which always gets screwed. I have one child in a private college, and one almost ready to apply.

[tmgs]

Tom,
The student loans available don't come anywhere near the cost of a private institution. The poor and the wealthy have a more wide-ranging choice of schools than the middle class, which always gets screwed. I have one child in a private college, and one almost ready to apply.

really, I guess a decent education can not be had any other way except a private institution?

my wife that has a Masters and a minor which she got buy using student loans to pay for it all. if I am not mistaken one of them was a private college, I will ask her tonight though.


Still I stand by my statement .......

"there is no reason for any younger generation NOT to get a decent education"

or do you not consider a education from a state college as decent? I guess a master degree is not decent education if you believe what you stated above


Tom

[KMC1]

Actually Tom, there are many reasons for people not getting an education. Divorce, negative influences during the childs formative years, alchohol/drug dependency, teenage pregnancy etc. etc. etc.
Also, there are major cultural problems within many predominantly poor demographics which make it very difficult for some to even attempt to succeed. In many major cities there are many different gang influences in the Asian, Black and Latino communities which all but determine those children will end up with numerous problems to deal with in addition to a criminal record.

I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying some people don't start out with the support factors some have started with, and have to overcome A LOT more than some others.

[Daman858]

Hey, I'm all for a draft...just as long as there are NO deferrments and EVERYONE, including females, must either do military service or some other type of service like the Peace Corps, US Pulic Health, etc.

[tmgs]

Actually Tom, there are many reasons for people not getting an education. Divorce, negative influences during the childs formative years, alchohol/drug dependency, teenage pregnancy etc. etc. etc.
Also, there are major cultural problems within many predominantly poor demographics which make it very difficult for some to even attempt to succeed. In many major cities there are many different gang influences in the Asian, Black and Latino communities which all but determine those children will end up with numerous problems to deal with in addition to a criminal record.

I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying some people don't start out with the support factors some have started with, and have to overcome A LOT more than some others.

yes there are many reasons, but there is no financial reason for it these days. I could have been more clear on that one since the thing that made me respond like that was the poor didn't have the same opportunity for education. It just simply is not true. there are many programs out there for one to get a education these days. We know several folks and my wife was one of them plus my daughter had a full scholarship

like I said if the parents could pound into the childs heads education is important.
My oldest was like that, he was smart as a whip yet he wasted it all.

Tom

[TandemCyclist]

Actually Tom, there are many reasons for people not getting an education. Divorce, negative influences during the childs formative years, alchohol/drug dependency, teenage pregnancy etc. etc. etc.
Also, there are major cultural problems within many predominantly poor demographics which make it very difficult for some to even attempt to succeed. In many major cities there are many different gang influences in the Asian, Black and Latino communities which all but determine those children will end up with numerous problems to deal with in addition to a criminal record.

I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying some people don't start out with the support factors some have started with, and have to overcome A LOT more than some others.

I was about to type those same words. I'm sure some will site the 1 in 4000 that overcome these adversities and think everyone should be able to do it, like the 4 or 5 people in America the that go from rags to riches. Good call Kevin.

[KMC1]

Tom does make some good points though. Like it really starts at home. The success or failure for many children lies in the home. My own personal feeling is that many of the problems I mentioned could be (and should be) defeated in the home, before our kids are even in their teens. Many of the outside forces on our kids; MTV, Hollywood, Violence and war in Video games etc. are things that can be controlled by involved parents. At some point people will need to acknowledge that our current cultural leanings towards hyper-consumerism (coming from a guy with THREE motorcycles :p ) and hyper achievement need to be balanced out with a peaceful home life and committed marriages.
But, that is most likely a long way off as we careen into national bankruptcy and social upheaval.