There have been more reports recently that the draft will be reinstated after the November elections, no matter who wins.
Many Kossaks defend Kerry for not respecting the views of most Democrats, and coming out in favor of a controlled US withdrawal from Iraq. But a draft would be unpopular with most Americans, not just Democrats. So why can't Kerry challenge Bush to promise that he will not reinstate the draft if he is (re-)elected? According to these reports, it is because Kerry himself wold reinstate the draft.
Pending Draft Legislation Targeted for Spring 2005 There is pending legislation in the House and Senate (twin bills: S 89 and HR 163) which will time the program's initiation so the draft can begin at early as Spring 2005 -- just after the 2004 presidential election. The administration is quietly trying to get these bills passed now, while the public's attention is on the elections, so our action on this is needed immediately.
Coming Soon: The Return of the Draft, a Bipartisan Production [T]he campaign for the draft is already under way, though election-year politics have dictated a nuanced approach. Long-dormant draft boards have been quietly reactivated and restaffed -- even as the Bush administration continues to claim, in the face of mounting evidence to the contrary, that current troop levels are sufficient.
Meanwhile, a consensus behind conscription is building on Capitol Hill. Senators Chuck Hagel (R-Neb) and Joseph Biden (D-Del), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, are among many prominent politicians suddenly calling for a "national debate" on the draft. Open supporters of the draft include Sen. Ernest Hollings (D-SC) and Reps. Nydia Velazsquez (D-NY), Pete Stark (D-Cal), and Charles Rangel (D-NY). HR 163 and S 89, Democrat-sponsored bills to restore conscription, are quietly working their way through committee. According to The Hill, Republicans are ready to sign on as soon as they get the nod from the Bush administration. . .
Would President Kerry make any difference? There's no reason to think so. Kerry has scrupulously avoided taking a position on the draft, but his approach to foreign policy is virtually indistinguishable from that of George Bush. . .
Kerry calls military service "the highest form of national service." Not coincidentally, a proposal for universal "National Service" is available on his campaign web site. The proposal closely resembles a recent DLC policy blueprint (Magee, From Selective Service to National Service: A Blueprint for Citizenship and Security in the 21st Century, 1993) that antidraft advocates see as a stealth plan for staged reintroduction of conscription.
Kerry's plan does not mention a military draft -- yet -- but incenting youth to join the armed forces is manifestly at its heart. The proposal would require draft registration for women and appears to makes financial aid for college contingent on two years' national service beginning at the age of 18. Even without a draft as such, Kerry's program represents a massive militarization of young people that provides ample opportunities for "patriotic" indoctrination, along with near-coercive incentives to join up.
Given that Kerry's plan for national service can be interpreted in this way, I think Kerry owes it to us to promise that he would not introduce the draft.
(The author of the second piece I quoted is a founding member of People Against the Draft.)