For the third time in the last six years, proposals to expand the current Selective Service registration requirement to include young women as well as young men were included in versions of this year’s annual National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2023, but were removed in back-room House-Senate leadership negotiations.
All mention of Selective Service has been removed from the conference proposal for the FY2023 NDAA introduced yesterday in the House Rules Committee.
As in 2016 and 2021, this year’s proposals to expand Selective Service registration to women were bundled into 2,000-page drafts of the NDAA without any hearings or floor debate in either the House or Senate, and without any consideration of the alternative bipartisan proposal – which has yet to receive a hearing or floor consideration in either the House or Senate – to repeal the Military Selective service Act and end draft registration entirely.
Again this year, as in 2016 and 2021, these provisions were removed from the final draft negotiated by House and Senate leaders and presented to both chambers yesterday for take-it-or-leave-it final approval.
Some other changes may be made to the latest draft of the FY 2023 NDAA before it is approved, but it seems highly unlikely that provisions to expand (or to end) Selective Service registration will be reinserted into this bill.
This doesn’t mean that debate about what to do about draft registration is over. Indeed, Congress has never really begun to debate the issue. This means only that Congress has, yet again, avoided facing up to the reality that, whether they like it or not, draft registration is an abject failure.
Expanding draft registration to women is still a bad idea that won’t go away until Congress ends draft registration entirely.
Congress has punted again, as it did in 2016 and 2021, but the ball is still in play. This issue could be raised during consideration of the annual NDAA, or – preferably, through freestanding legislation that would allow more in-depth consideration and debate – next year, or the year after that, or ten or twenty years from now.
The future of Congressional consideration of draft registration is especially uncertain because both the lead advocate for expanding draft registration to women, Rep. Jackie Speier (D-San Mateo, CA), and the lead House Democratic sponsor of the Selective Service Repeal Act, Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR), chose not to run for re-election this year. This makes it critically important to urge other members of Congress to take up the lead in reintroducing and co-sponsoring the Selective Service Repeal Act in 2023.
More antiwar feminists are speaking up for an end to Selective Service, further undermining the bogus claim that preparation for larger, longer, more unpopular wars than people would be willing to fight is somehow a feminist policy. Notably, this year the National Organization for Women joined the many other endorsers of the Selective Service Repeal Act
For now, unless and until Congress changes the law, all male (as assigned at birth) U.S. residents are still required to register with the Selective Service System within 30 days of their 18th birthday, and report within 10 days every time they chance their address until their 26th birthday – although few do. Draft boards continue to be appointed to administer a possible draft.
The Selective Service System has managed to evade meaningful scrutiny of its purpose or fitness for purpose throughout forty years of failure since it was brought out of "deep standby" in 1980. In the absence of a movement for abolition of the Selective Service System, it could keep going for another forty years on institutional inertia and Congressional reluctance to throw in the towel and admit defeat in the face of quiet but pervasive and persistent popular disregard for the law.
US war planners assume that a draft is always available as a fallback. Ending Selective Service registration and contingency planning and preparation for a draft would help reign in planning for endless, unlimited, unpopular wars. But that isn’t likely to happen unless the failure of draft registration becomes more widely recognized, and unless Congress sees more visible signs that young women will resist any attempt to expand draft registration, and older people will support them in their resistance.
I’m confident that young women will resist draft registration, as young men have done for decades. It’s up to us to educate, agitate, and amplify their resistance.
Edward Hasbrouck maintains the Resisters.info website and publishes the "Resistance News" newsletter. He was imprisoned in 1983-1984 for organizing resistance to draft registration.
“All mention of Selective Service has been removed from the conference proposal for the FY2023 NDAA introduced yesterday in the House Rules Committee.”
“….and without any consideration of the alternative bipartisan proposal – which has yet to receive a hearing or floor consideration in either the House or Senate – to repeal the Military Selective service Act and end draft registration entirely.”
I suppose that it should come as no surprise that the organization whose knee-jerk response to any situation that requires their action is to ‘kick the can down the road’ for someone else to deal with later. It is long past time for the ‘feet’ doing that kicking to be held to the fire and forced to end this obscene remnant of involuntary slavery in the service of the aggressive US empire’s war crimes. End draft registration entirely !
And without a draft, Americans don’t care about all their evil wars. People with your point of view don’t seem to understand that without risk and possible consequences, Americans aren’t going to care that the U.S. murders people and destroys entire societies around the world in service of the U.S. empire. We need a major rebellion against U.S. wars, not an apathetic public that offers no resistance to them like we have now. Bring back the draft and you’ll quickly see a strong opposition to all these wars.
“People with your point of view don’t seem to understand that without risk and possible consequences, Americans aren’t going to care that the U.S. murders people and destroys entire societies around the world in service of the U.S. empire.”
If you think that being put at potential risk will turn amoral sheep into ethical activists, then it is your point of view that is blatantly divorced from reality. The craving for self-preservation only feeds a demand for safety and ethics isn’t among the characteristics of pleading sheep.
You totally misunderstand my comment, even though I was totally clear. It’s not that people will become more moral and/or ethical with a reinstatement of the draft, it’s that self-preservation will cause them to oppose the wars. I’m not divorced from reality, quite the contrary. All you have to do is look at the state of the country during the Vietnam war — young people and college campuses in open rebellion, constant very large demonstrations and sit-ins against the war, etc. — to see that what I’m saying is true.
“It’s not that people will become more moral and/or ethical with a reinstatement of the draft, it’s that self-preservation will cause them to oppose the wars.”
And I am afraid you misunderstood my reply. The only thing in the way of opposition that will be increased if the draft is started again is opposition to the draft itself, not any general opposition to the State’s imperial warmongering. If my generations anti-war activism in the 60’s had not coincided with the military draft, I seriously doubt that there would have been any widespread condemnation of any US war actions as can be plainly seen by that same generation’s near universal indifference to such actions in their later lives. It was only the size of this particular age cohort of baby boomers that gave their draft resistance any temporal social significance.
Opposition to war requires an ethical grounding in individuals and a personal capacity to rise above the social morality that excuses and tolerates it. A desire for personal safety and individual self-protection will not suffice and that is why opposition to war is an atypical minority view in 21st century American society, a place that regards ethics with disdain and contempt; a situation that will not be changed by military conscription, irregardless of that making the wars even more evil by compounding them with slavery.
“All good ends can be worked out by good means. Those that cannot, are bad; and may be counted so at once, and left alone.”
~ Charles Dickens
“If you think that being put at potential risk will turn amoral sheep into ethical activists, then it is your point of view that is blatantly divorced from reality.”
How does that comment square with your most recent response?
We’ll have to agree to disagree on this. We protested the Vietnam war and the draft, and the war was the big issue. Young people were terrified of being sent to Vietnam, and if you don’t remember that, you don’t remember this correctly. Of course a lot of us were morally opposed to that war also, but looking at this now it’s clear that most of the opposition was due to fear of being killed or wounded in Vietnam for a cause few people supported.
We do agree that moral opposition to war is the best reason for opposing it. In Buddhism they say that why a person does something is more important than what they do. I wouldn’t go that far — though this has to be a case-by-case analysis — but why people do things is generally equally important. The current U.S. population has been made brain dead with constant digital screens in front of their faces, and has never been taught to care about others, except in superficial and manipulative ways, such as sympathy for Ukraine. We seem to agree that this is a huge problem, and I have no solution for it. On the other hand, you didn’t respond to my question about what your solution is if you don’t want the draft reinstated.
“How does that comment square with your most recent response?”
I think it is completely consistent with it. You stated: “….it’s that self-preservation will cause them to oppose the wars.”
I replied that: “The only thing in the way of opposition that will be increased if the draft is started again is opposition to the draft itself, not any general opposition to the State’s imperial warmongering.”
I understand that we both are in opposition to the States imperial wars. You seem to believe that reintroducing involuntary slavery into the situation will somehow result in increased opposition to the States wars. As I note above, I do not share this belief.
“…you didn’t respond to my question about what your solution is if you don’t want the draft reinstated.”
The answer is that I want ALL of the States evil and unjust actions terminated; the current ones AND the potential future ones. I would ideally desire that the State itself be eliminated. I want an end to the hubristic, meddling, aggressive, not defensive, imperial wars; attempts to dictate how the world should conform to the wishes and benefit of the American government. And I do not want any future exacerbations of that evil through the re-imposition of military conscription because I don’t believe it will cause any increase in opposition to those wars and because I am ethical enough to believe that you can’t accomplish good by doing evil.
As you said, we must agree to disagree, thanks for carrying on the discussion civilly.
I need to make one more point here:
Even if we were living in small numbers as hunter-gatherers, we would still have to defend our territories to some extent like all animals do. Why should only the poor and financially desperate people have to do this? That’s what we get with an all-volunteer army. As much as I hate Israel, they’ve got this right: everyone has to serve. The left seems to have a major problem with personal responsibility, and opposing the draft is one of the results of that. It’s everyone’s responsibility to contribute to their society, which is what a draft promotes.
We both oppose war, we also oppose statism, I oppose industrial society, and if people are going to fight wars, they should be fought strictly on battlefields with pre-industrial weapons in order to eliminate collateral damage and environmental harms. Given the current realities and possibilities, reinstating the draft is my preferred alternative to accomplishing this.
“War is bad. Let’s try slavery to counteract it!”
The biggest political mistake of my life was opposing the draft during the Vietnam war. Well, we got what we wanted, but we weren’t careful what to wish for. The draft was ended not because it was slavery or otherwise immoral, but because the ruling elite wanted to stop the public opposition to U.S. wars of empire. These people know what they’re doing, and they got exactly what they wanted by ending the draft, which is a citizenry that’s apathetic to U.S. wars. If you have a better idea that you can show has worked to reinstate a powerful peace movement in the U.S., I’m all ears (and eyes).
The only idea that’s not better than slavery is mass murder. And it doesn’t have to be one of those two things.
So in other words, you’d rather have the U.S. being allowed to murder people around the world and destroy their societies and countries than reinstate the draft and make Americans face at least some consequences for that?
Everyone contributing to their society through, among other things, a draft, is not “slavery.” That’s really demeaning, minimizing, and insulting to actual slaves.
“…reinstate the draft and make Americans face at least some consequences for that?”
Really?!
Americans unwillingly conscripted; i.e. enslaved, to do the bidding of the US empire are not ‘guilty’ of the actions of that empire (unlike those who volunteer to serve it) and to inflict such ‘consequences’ (what a nice sanitary euphemism for coercion, maiming and even death) on them even if they don’t support it, is the very definition of an unjust and criminal act.
1. Our priorities are different. My priority here is the victims of U.S. wars. Yours seems to be Americans, who you think are all innocent. As I said, leftists seem to have a big problem with individual responsibility. Of course those with the most money & power are the most responsible, but all mentally competent adults have at least some responsibility for these wars. For example, most of these are oil wars. Therefore, if you drive you have some responsibility for them, and the more gasoline you consume, the more responsibility you have.
2. You didn’t respond to my reply in your thread about everyone taking some responsibility for defending the country. Not that the U.S. needs any defending, but if we’re going to maintain a military — and to be clear, my preference is that it should be abolished — then everyone should have to pitch in.
“So in other words, you mean exactly the opposite of what you JUST SAID, because I find that more convenient than what you JUST SAID?”
Fixed, no charge.
Being enslaved by the warfare state isn’t “contributing to society.”
You oppose reinstatement of the draft, and I asked for your idea(s) for rebuilding serious resistance to U.S. wars and a strong peace movement. I understand your response, but you didn’t answer the question by providing any solutions. We all agree that we don’t want U.S. wars, but what those of you arguing against the draft don’t get is that Americans have become totally apathetic on this issue because the vast majority of them face no consequences for U.S. wars.
The terror of being drafted or a loved one being drafted during the Vietnam war was enough to put the country into rebellion, and we need that again. You say that we don’t have to have a draft or U.S. wars, but explain where the opposition to those wars is going to come from if Americans face no consequences for them?
To be clear, I said that all people defend their territory, and the U.S. is no different. Any country without a military will be invaded, regardless of how much we dislike that fact. The U.S. doesn’t need much defending, with oceans to the east & west, a lapdog country to the north, and a non-belligerent country to the south, but you have to have something, maybe just a coast guard and a border patrol. Considering that, it’s everyone’s responsibility to serve, and you never responded to the fact that in the current system, only the poor, the working class, and the desperate join the military. What do you propose to do about that?
“You oppose reinstatement of the draft, and I asked for your idea(s) for rebuilding serious resistance to U.S. wars and a strong peace movement. I understand your response, but you didn’t answer the question by providing any solutions.”
If someone proposes randomly executing five-year-olds as an “idea for rebuilding serious resistance to arson,” I’m not under any obligation to propose an “alternative solution.” I can just point out that randomly executing five-year-olds is evil and shouldn’t be done under any circumstances.
“Any country without a military will be invaded”
How many times has Costa Rica been invaded since it eliminated its military in 1948?
How many times has Dominica been invaded since it eliminated its military in 1981?
How many times has Liechtenstein been invaded since it eliminated its army in 1861?
“it’s everyone’s responsibility to serve”
Not everyone shares your apparently deeply held religious belief that the state is God and therefore magically entitled to the service of the people it treats as livestock to be milked, sheared, and slaughtered at will.
If you think that only the poor, the working class, and the desperate join the military in the current system, that thing you’re doing that you think is thinking isn’t. I was from a working class family myself, but I knew several people in the Corps who drew more from their trust funds than they did in pay.
Costa Rica and the Dominican Republic are protected by the U.S. I didn’t advocate executing anyone, let alone 5-year-olds. That comment is hysterical BS, totally detached from reality compared to what I said.
Obviously I was speaking hyperbolically, and I’m talking about enlisted people, not officers. But the vast majority of people volunteering for the army, which is the only branch that drafts people, are people from the groups I described. What time period are you talking about regarding your experiences? Looks like it’s long ago, which would make those experiences irrelevant to today’s situation.
N.B. Dominica and the Dominican Republic are two entirely different countries. The latter has an army. The former neither has an army nor is “protected by the US.”
My military experience was in the 1980s and 1990s, but I know people who are in to this day. One friend who joined in the oughts was of upper middle class background but decided he’d rather get pay and benefits for learning to program computers than pay to learn to program computers.
Yes, I understand that you didn’t advocate executing anyone. You advocated enslaving everyone.
I prefer the guillotine.
Well, you bring back the draft that whole “hey you volunteered for this sh!t” angle goes away. Dont want to lose that dodge.
Whether women should be included is a minor issue. The real issue here is that the draft should be reinstated. (Actually, what should happen is that the U.S. military should be shrunk by 75-90%, all foreign military bases closed, and all U.S. wars ended, but that’s another albeit related issue.) Without a draft, the vast majority of Americans don’t really care about all these U.S. wars of empire. Let’s put everyone at risk of being drafted and possibly being killed or wounded, and there will be a major sea change like we saw during the Vietnam war. Right now, there’s virtually no anti-war movement in the U.S., with Code Pink being a tiny lone voice in the wilderness.
“Actually, what should happen is that the U.S. military should be shrunk by 75-90%, all foreign military bases closed, and all U.S. wars ended…”
An excellent idea. And if that was accomplished not even the Pentagon would require a draft to fill its recruitment goals. In fact, we could abolish the ‘standing army’ military branches and defend the country with voluntary state militias.
Of course. One of the reasons that we fought against the draft during the Vietnam was that we thought that without it, the U.S. military would become a lot smaller and less powerful, because they wouldn’t be able to get enough people to volunteer. We didn’t consider that they could use bribery and economic coercion to get people to volunteer, and we were very wrong.
“Everyone” isn’t (and wouldn’t be) at risk of being drafted, under current contingency plans or any likely proposal. Only young people are threatened with being drafted, and the ageism of the draft is one of the reasons to oppose a draft.
First, young people have parents and other older relatives, and they don’t want their kids, grandkids, and nephews to be killed or wounded. Second, it’s not ageism, that’s ridiculous. The peak age for physical traits like athleticism for humans is 30 years, so you don’t want older people fighting in a military.
If the draft is retained, I propose no student deferments. To me, it speaks of some being “better” than others. The “others” can be canon fodder.
I fully agree. Everyone should be subject to the draft, including the president’s son (if he’s the proper age) and the sons of the ruling class.
Don’t fool yourself. If the draft is ever reinstated, there will be abundant dodges for the children of the wealthy and the political class.
To propose an idea is the first step. To assume an idea will not work is to resign oneself to defeat.
Realism has a decidedly ugly side when it comes to dialogs concerned with paths to change.
I share your skepticism. However I am 79 and have an irrelevant place in the scheme of things where they affect the young.
Body bags tend to bring wars home and wars brought home tend to end wars.
Exactly! Glad someone beside me here gets it.