When my grandpa got a call one day saying that his number had been picked for the drafting of troops for the Vietnam War, the lives at stake were more than just his own. Knowing that his wife was going to give birth to their first child, my mother, any day now was the only thing on his mind. The ruthless recruiter at the time would not stand down when he gave them the answer "no" and continued to call for the next three weeks quite frequently. Making an arrangement where my grandfather didn't have to leave until my mother was born is the most that the service was going to budge for his deployment. Agreeing to this horrifying offer of deferment, my grandfather was now even more afraid of my mother's birth. Taking away the joy from having a baby was exactly what the draft did to my grandfather. Luckily, my mother was three weeks late and by this time the recruiter was fed up with the wasted time and stopped calling my grandfather meaning that the generals decided to draft someone else in his place based on the inconvenience. If my mother would have been born on time, deployment would have come fast and furious for my grandpa, leaving his wife and brand new baby at home alone for months. Knowing my family's history involving the military draft I have strong feelings toward keeping the draft suspended. For the United States to reinstate the draft it would put millions of young men and their families at risk for an unnecessary cause--our qualified all volunteer military force now has been stronger and more effective than ever; keeping the draft suspended, with a back-up service for emergencies, has proven its worth in the past decade and changing this way of deployment so suddenly can cause commotion and harm in the military forces and the country as a whole.

What would the military draft consist of?

If the military were to reinstate the draft today a crisis would have to occur where more troops are needed than the military can supply at said time; congress has to pass the bill to the President to sign and the draft can be started again. The way in which the draft pick men is based on a lottery system, " ... birthdays determines the order in which registered men are called up by Selective Service. The first to be called, in a sequence determined by the lottery, will be men whose 20th birthday falls during that year, followed, if needed, by those aged 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25. 18-year-olds and those turning 19 would probably not be drafted" (Military Spot 2008). Along with the lottery system, all Reserve Force Officers are to report for duty as well as State Directors for each branch. Mental and physical evaluations will take place using a test to make sure the men are fit for active service; after passing, the men are to report to a base for induction. Yes these men are inducted into the United States Military, but no they are not trained yet and have no capability of being sent overseas soon. The training process takes time which isn't going to be available if troops are needed immediately -- highlighting the use of the reserves as a better back up option. The use of these principles and guidelines is highly unlikely because the US Military has many inducements available, including enlistment bonuses, to fill recruitment shortages. 

Selective Service and Reserves:

Operating as an independent agency of the United States Government, the Selective Service System acts as a standby system for the military draft. Holding records on every eligible citizen and immigrant in the country, all men are required to register any time before 30 days following their 18th birthday. In case of major military crisis this system is ready to anoint men to be deployed based on their age and physical/mental abilities, just as the draft once did. "It's important to know that even though he is registered, a man will not automatically be inducted into the military. In a crisis requiring a draft, men would be called in a sequence determined by random lottery number and year of birth. Then, they would be examined for mental, physical, and moral fitness by the military before being deferred or exempted from military service or inducted into the Armed Forces"(Selective Service). Despite the success of the all-volunteer force that has been in place since 1973, the Selective Service is necessary based on the involvement in the national security strategy. Fairness and equitability are what drive the agency to do good for the nation as a whole in case of the depletion of our military force. With a much more liable lottery system for the draft, if the time ever comes where it is needed to be used the likelihood of being drafted is drawn randomly and not based on date of birth and registration time solely. 

Costs of a military draft/training:

In the terms of men eligible for the draft, over 4 million new citizens are enlisted every year leaving the military no room to keep all of these men under their care or to spend billions of dollars to train each of them properly. With an all-volunteer force already trained highly in militia, budget can go toward better training for this tight force or used for other necessities besides training new men each year. With an estimated cost of 1 billion dollars to train a new force as qualified and effective as our all-volunteer force on duty today, the budget doesn't allow any room for other military needs that come their way. The military as it is now is saving thousands, if not billions of dollars in the military budget to be used elsewhere or saved for desperate times. The costs of conscription are going to skyrocket college tuitions as soon as administrators realize that taxpayers are going to pay for these new conscripts' secondary education after their served duty. "It is unfair to older adults, too, who would see their taxes rise ... " (Mataconis). Men with higher opportunity costs come with much lower rates of induction because they are most productive in civilian life. "These are of course the ones least likely to be attracted by military service, unless the military is willing to offer them comparable salaries. With the exception of medical doctors, however, the military will not generally be interested in paying salaries which would attract those who are unusually productive in civilian life" (Lee 1974). The military is not usually interested in paying salaries of men who don't have a very productive civilian life outside of their job such as writers, scientists, etc. who will not make contributions to the military based on their small salary and commitment to their work. With higher productive rates comparing to the salaries received, the costs for inducting men are much lower saving the military money for an all-volunteer army.

In terms of economic problems for the rest of the country, two million men taken out of the work force to be deployed will hit large companies hard. Drafting these men out of their jobs are also having to be paid to fill in their salaries from their jobs they are being stripped from. Deficits from the government and taxes as well are going to raise coming from this money they men are needing to be paid. "Maybe two million people would be taken out of the work force -- that's a big hit to the economy. We'd have to pay them too, because we can't have slave labor. So run up more government deficits or taxes as you run up the flag. Add in training costs, food, uniforms, ammunition, and you have a tidy sum that would be better spent educating them in useful matters" (Bodenner). Within the military today many of the positions and jobs are very technical and need a high rate of training to succeed properly, but with the conscription the men are trained very fast and serve for a short amount of time with a rapid turnover rate. Seeming like this shorter training will save money, the turnover rate hinders the budget forcing the services to keep retraining men for the same positions that are no going to last. With the all-volunteer military, the training has already been done to a great degree and does not need to be retrained based on the very low turnover rates and long serving times.

Violation of young men's liberty/early adulthood:

Milton Freidman, a well-known economist during Richard Nixon's presidency, took a lead role in bringing an end to the military draft during the late years of his term. The end of the military draft had been in place without interruption or question since before World War II, until Freidman decided to finally act on it. "Friedman called the draft--inconsistent with a free society, and he was absolutely right" (Mataconis). With the draft in place, it essentially put a person's life in the hands of the state, giving them the right to send them wherever necessary or needed. Everything that the United States stands for contributing to personal rights and freedom of speech are violated indirectly with the draft. "My opposition to the very idea of the draft has always been based not in the impracticality of trying to integrate a bunch of just-out-of-high-school draftees into a modern, advanced military, but in the fact that the very act constitutes a gross violation of individual liberty" (Mataconis). As for all citizens in the United States, many basic rights are in place that we are entitled to no matter what. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a document formed to list all of the basic rights of citizens; proclaimed in December of 1948, this document contains approximately 30 basic human rights, most of which are dealing with equality and freedom. Article 3 states, "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person" (United Nations). Highlighting the right to security is the most arguable part of this article. Security is defined as the state of being free from danger or threat; serving in the United States military is one of the most contradicting events that can happen. When serving in the military and fighting for the country as a whole, some things are put at risk including security. The wars we have fought in the past and the wars we are fighting now against highly trained countries impose a huge threat to everyone's security placing them in dangers way. Volunteers of the military and reserves are fully aware of these consequences and risks that will be faced and choose to fight after weighing the options. Men who are forced into being drafted for the military have not decided that they are willing to risk their security to fight for the country which is arguably a violation of the security rights every person has. If someone has the right to life and security but are being forced to give their security and possible life up for the country itself, the human rights for this country aren't what they state. Based on freedom, everyone has the rights to choose what they do with their lives and how they spend them.

A secondary education in today's economy is crucial for a well payed and supportive job; if the draft is reinstated this will hinder young men's ability to get the secondary education they need which can place career goals behind. As featured in The News Gazette this past January, a Champaign County Judge, Michael Jones, shares his personal experience with the interference of the draft with his secondary education. After high school Jones was pursing his career by attending law school in Illinois the fall of 1969. When troops were needed immediately for the war in Vietnam, his education took a turn in the opposite direction. " ... was drafted right out of his first semester of law school at the University of Illinois in the fall of 1969. He wasn't even allowed to finish the semester" (Dey). Jones was only one of thousands if not millions of men that were drafted in a very inconvenient time in their education and possibly future career. With today's costs for secondary education not being able to be refunded for such a quick leave of absence the draft could potentially cause unnecessary debt from classes not even being counted toward a degree.

Why should we reinstate the draft?

Charles Rangel, member of the US House of Representatives and Korean War veteran, strongly believes that reinstating the draft will make America safer as well as gain support for the military as a whole. Although he has no doubt that he is right about the conscription, he has yet to convince other lawmakers that he is right. Believing that if war is necessary, which it is, then the country needs to come together as a whole to support and defend the nation has become popular of draft supporters. While another popular belief argued by Rangel is that men who are volunteering for the military are the poor and young "fighting a rich man's war." Rangel says in a podcast, "If we're going to get into wars, we have to be prepared to make sacrifices, it shouldn't just be poor-ass kids volunteering to do the work" (Rangel). Although research has shown that almost 99% of the men that volunteer have graduated high school with a diploma and has had at least one successful job sometime during their life. Alongside these beliefs of Rangel and his supporters, he also says that our all-volunteer military isn't strong enough anymore to survive this decade of wars is refutable without question, "And military leaders repeatedly have shot down the idea, saying they now boast a much smaller but more highly trained and highly disciplined fighting force than they did before the draft was abolished in 1973" (Military Times).

Although the beliefs of Rangel that only poor men are fighting in the military voluntarily seem exaggerated, there are truths behind it that come as a surprise. Right now in the economy, America suffers from the biggest income gap between the lowest and highest class citizens in history. As a result, the young men and children from the privileged families feel no pity to enlist in the military, knowing the burden that is falling on the lower and working class members of society. The Heritage Foundation, which conducts large quantities of research and studies on key policy issues around the country, conducted a study called "Who Serves in the Military?" to highlight the economic issues entering the military. What they found is that, " ... more than three-quarters of recruits into the All Volunteer Force come from neighborhoods with incomes of less than $65,000, and only 6.15 percent come from neighborhoods with an income of over $90,000, with not one individual from a household with an income exceeding $246,333" (Bica). Knowing that only the working and lower classes are willing to serve in the United States military shows that the unequal economic force is hitting hard. Although there are few troops from higher income households, the majority of these high class citizens are not serving at all and have no intentions of doing so. Arguing that bringing back the draft will help the economic gap be wiped out from the military force is a major argument for those in favor of the draft. While this argument seems reasonable and reliable the truth behind this argument backfires. Reinstating the draft will fail to solve any classism problems in the force today; the wealthy and highly privileged individuals will always be able to escape the sacrifice of war whether it be by deferment or knowing higher officials, leaving the lack of concern for the military still low and in demand.

As a main concern before the Iraq war was the possibility of depletion among troops and resources that were already burdened by a number of obligations. Many government officials including Rangel tried to argue that a draft was necessary because the war with Iraq was definitely going to deplete our resources and put our military in a tricky position. The evolving global war on terrorism will also effect the resources they said, "We can expect the evolving global war on terrorism to drain our military resources even more, stretching them to the limit" (Rangel). Now that it is 2016 and our military has had NO use for a backup military or even considered the draft, it's seen that the absurd thoughts by Rangel and his followers are not backed by any proof leaving more people to disbelieve his thoughts for the draft.

As a supporter of keeping the military draft suspended, there are ways around the draft in case of need without the harmful effects of the drafting process itself. While forcefully making men sign their lives away when they enlist in the draft it creates a sense of fear and turns these men away from the want to serve our country. Any other way to recruit troops to the military without forcing anyone to sign their lives away would make more men aware of the military as well as possibly change their minds about running away from serving. Naturally when told to do something, the opposite is bound to happen just as human nature has shown to reveal which is the same case in the military draft. When men are knowing that at the age of 18 they are going to risking their lives is something no one wants to do at such a young age, and also makes it seem like a scary and horrible thing which turns men away. Yes, being deployed and fighting for this country's freedom is very scary and life threatening but there are many more perks that come from it as well. Only highlighting the threatening and serious part about serving when forced to sign up for the draft completely puts the great things that come from it in the dark. A humbling adventure that builds many skills and heightens the love for your country is being pushed to the side and covered by the forcefulness of enlisting and the threats of being deployed with the draft in place ... is it really worth it?

