URGENT: RANGEL CALLS TO REINSTATE THE DRAFT

Draft? or No Draft? We Say No! FROM THE Center on Conscience & War with continued support of duckdaotsu media June 1, 2005 n May 26, 2005 Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) renewed his call for the reinstatement of the military draft. Rep. Rangel re-introduced his notorious draft bill from the last Congress under the same name with a new number, the Universal National Service Act of 2005 (H.R. 2723). Additionally, on May 18 Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) introduced a bill (H.R. 2455) to repeal the Selective Service Act. Paul’s bill will eliminate the Selective Service System and give a definite assurance that a draft is truly, not coming back. Through a press statement released by the his office, Rangel said, “I oppose the war in Iraq, but I support the military and the men and women who serve in it, what is happening now indicates to me that the entire volunteer system is in danger of collapse under the weight of the burden being placed on those who are serving.” Rangel goes on to talk about the failure by the Army to meet its recruiting goals during the past several months and he says that a having a draft will solve the quantitative problem of having the right number of people to serve in Iraq and other places. Rep. Rangel also states that officials in the White House will be less likely to go to war if their own children and the children of “CEOs in the boardrooms” were serving. Rangel believes that a military draft will solve the problem of social and class inequity in the military and act as a deterrent to war. Contrary to Rangel’s belief the draft has never and will not act as a deterrent to war. And it will never make the Armed Forces a representative force! People of low income and people of color will continue to serve on the front lines, with or without a draft. The wealthy and the powerful have always been able to exploit the system to avoid being drafted. (SEE BELOW FOR TALKING POINTS ABOUT THE DRAFT) Rep. Rangel is correct in saying that the military is having a much harder time luring fresh recruits and that the “entire volunteer system is in danger of collapse.” However, a military draft is not a way to solve the problem. The United States needs to consider seriously a major shift in its foreign policy and not rush to war. The good news is that (due to lobbying efforts by CCW and others) H.R. 2723 does not have any original co-sponsors. Rep. Rangel, so far, is the sole sponsor of the bill. Furthermore, Rangel’s new bill is less objectionable. It gives better provisions for conscientious objectors than his conscription bill in the previous Congress. CO provision in H.R. 2723 reflects the language that is already in law under the Selective Service Act. Anyone opposed to “participation in war in any form” will be exempt from military service and will be required to perform alternative civilian service. H.R. 2723 was referred to the Armed Services committee, where it is expected to stay. The majority of Congressional members are saying that they will not support a draft. Now is the time to reaffirm that. Get in touch with your Congressional member and ask them to co-sponsor the Ron Paul bill (H.R. 2455) and tell them that a draft is never a viable option and that there is no such thing as a “fair draft.” [Go to www.house.gov to contact your Representative]

TALKING POINTS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (SEE BELOW) * Conscientious Objector Belief Sheet * Anti-draft geared toward members sympathetic towards COs * Anti-draft geared toward conservative Congress members FROM THE CENTER ON CONSCIENCE AND WAR The Center on Conscience & War (CCW), formerly the National Interreligious Service Board for Conscientious Objectors (NISBCO), was formed in 1940 by an association of religious bodies. CCW works to defend and extend the rights of conscientious objectors. The Center is committed to supporting all those who question participation in war, whether they are U.S. citizens, permanent residents, documented or undocumented immigrants--or citizens in other countries. CCW, located in Washington, DC, is governed by a Board of Directors and employs a staff to serve the Center's national constituency. Services are provided to the public at no charge. CCW participates in the G.I. Rights Hotline, a national referral and counseling service for military personnel. In the event of a military draft, CCW will assist in the placement of conscientious objectors in alternative service programs. The Center is opposed to all forms of conscription. The Center is a non-profit organization recognized under 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. As such, donations to the Center are tax deductible to the exent of the law. Mailing Address: Center on Conscience & War (NISBCO) 1830 Connecticut Avenue NW Washington, DC 20009 Telephone: (202) 483-2220 1-800-379-2679 Fax: (202) 483-1246 Email: ccw@centeronconscience.org

Center on Conscience & War National Interreligious Service Board for Conscientious Objectors Conscription: Curbing Freedom “The most fundamental objection to draft registration is moral...a draft or draft registration destroys the very values that our society is committed to defending.” — Ronald Reagan Background Certain signs point in the direction of a military draft. U.S. Troops are stretched thin across the globe with commitments in hundreds of countries. Many National Guard and Reserve units are being used for tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, and with a continual rise in casualty many GIs are saying that they will not reenlist. Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), who introduced a conscription bill in order to make the Armed Services equitable, has revived his push for this bill. In the wake of another “national emergency” there will be more serious calls for the return of the draft. Bringing back the draft will make things worse for America, in regard to its military strength and individual freedom. Points Conscription will take away the fundamental right to individual freedom. It will transfer power from civil society to the state. As a result, America’s youth will loose control of their destiny to the government. The Military’s problem of troop retention will worsen under a draft. Retention is a problem even under an “all-volunteer” force. Under conscription, the Armed Services will be filled with people who don’t want to be there. The “War on Terrorism” requires Elite Forces, not mass conscripts. To fight an elusive enemy, a mass army would be counter-productive . Conscription has never made the Armed Services more equitable – neither racially nor economically. Throughout the draft during Vietnam, minorities disproportionately served on the front lines. The affluent had, and still have, the means to gain medical deferments, or to get positions that will not place them on the front lines of the battle. The draft will never make the military an equitable force. The draft has never acted as a deterrent to war, as some believe. While the draft was in effect, the U.S. was involved in numerous wars. In fact, during the Vietnam War conscription ensured a steady flow of bodies into the battlefield. Another way to avoid a draft is by reforming recruitment tactics. Many recruits, after joining, feel that the recruiter has deceived them. There will not be a troop retention problem if recruitment tactics were reformed. If there is a proposal for the return of the draft, members of Congress should opt against it for the sake of liberty and individual freedom.

Center on Conscience & War National Interreligious Service Board for Conscientious Objectors Draft and Conscientious Objection “So, for the record, here is what conscientious objectors object to: We object to killing…. We object to being forced to register for war and killing, and we object to being forced to participate in the preparations for war and killing. We object to killing innocent civilians, and we object to killing soldiers…when war comes, many of us will perform peaceful alternative service. Many of us will go to jail rather than compromise deeply held beliefs. But we will not fight. We will not kill.” -- Charles A. Maresca Jr., Former Associate Director of the Center on Conscience & War. Background Certain signs point in the direction of a military draft. U.S. Troops are stretched thin across the globe with commitments in over two hundred countries. Many National Guard and Reserve units are being used for tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, and with a continual rise in casualty many are saying that they will not reenlist. Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), who introduced a conscription bill in the last Congress, is likely to introduce it again. In the wake of another “national emergency” there will be more serious calls for the return of conscription. The rights of conscientious objectors need to be protected in the event of a military draft. Points Conscientious objectors (CO) are opposed to their participation in any kind of war and they oppose being involved in the preparations for war. Conscription has never made the Armed Services more equitable – neither racially nor economically. During the draft in the Vietnam War, minorities disproportionately served on the front lines. The affluent had, and still have, the means to gain medical deferments, or to get positions that will not place them on the front lines of the battle. The draft will never make the military an equitable force. The draft has never acted as a deterrent to war, as some believe. While the draft was in effect, the U.S. began numerous wars. In fact, during World War I, the reason for the instatement of the draft was to ensure a steady flow of soldiers into the battlefield. Rather than a draft the United States must reduce military commitments abroad, reduce the burden on National Guard and Reserve units, and seek multilateral diplomatic means for solving conflicts. If there is a proposal for the return of the draft, members of Congress should opt against it for the sake of liberty and religious freedom.

Center on Conscience & War National Interreligious Service Board for Conscientious Objectors Conscientious Objectors In our efforts to educate Congress about conscientious objection (CO), it is important to recognize that COs can be placed on a wide spectrum of range and depth of beliefs. The government defines a CO as someone who is “opposed to participation in war in any form based on a religious or moral belief.” In reality, however, not all COs can fit into such a strict definition. The range of CO beliefs are as follows: • Every person is a conscientious objector. Everyone has ethical, moral, or religious objections to their participation in some form of war, violence, preparations for war, or paying for war. Everybody has moral standards that their conscience will forbid them to cross. • Conscientious objectors are those who are opposed to participating in a particular or an unjust war. There are some who believe that there can be certain wars that are justified. While they do not oppose their participation in just wars, their conscience, however, will not allow them to participate in unjust wars. • Conscientious objectors are those who will serve in the military only as non-combatants. Some do not oppose being part of the military, but their conscience will not allow them to carry a weapon or kill another person. • Conscientious objectors are those who are opposed to participating in all wars. Some believe that there can be no wars that are justified. Their participation in any war will be a violation of their conscience. • Conscientious objectors are those who refuse to register with Selective Service. Many COs are willing to comply with Selective Service by registering. There are, however, many others who cannot, without violating deeply held beliefs, register for the draft. They would rather forego government aid for college and face other serious penalties than violate their beliefs. • Conscientious objectors are those who refuse to perform alternative service during a draft. Most COs are willing to perform alternative service in the event of a draft. However, there are others who believe that by performing alternative service, they are legitimizing the draft system. As a result they would rather go to jail than violate their conscience. • Conscientious objectors are those who refuse to pay military taxes. There are some COs who believe that it is wrong for them to pay taxes which fund the military. They would rather have property taken from them or live below the poverty line and avoid paying for war, than violate deeply held beliefs.

I shall die, but that is all that I shall do for Death. I hear him leading his horse out of the stall; I hear the clatter on the barn-floor. He is in haste; he has business in Cuba, business in the Balkans, many calls to make this morning. But I will not hold the bridle while he clinches the girth. And he may mount by himself: I will not give him a leg up. Though he flick my shoulders with his whip, I will not tell him which way the fox ran. With his hoof on my breast, I will not tell him where the black boy hides in the swamp. I shall die, but that is all that I shall do for Death; I am not on his pay-roll. I will not tell him the whereabout of my friends nor of my enemies either. Though he promise me much, I will not map him the route to any man's door. Am I a spy in the land of the living, that I should deliver men to Death? Brother, the password and the plans of our city are safe with me; never through me Shall you be overcome. "Conscientious Objector" by Edna St. Vincent Millay Horse by Xu Yun Ink on Paper 27" x 54"

DUCKDAOTSU if you support our work we need your help to sustain our site one time donation or subscribe at $5 per month (first month free!) write to editor home page news page search duckdaotsu