The Digital Collegian - Published independently by students at Penn State
OPINIONS
[ Tuesday, Oct. 12, 2004 ]

Election year promises limit truth of media concerning U.S. draft
 
Collegian's editorial opinion is determined by its Board of Opinion, with the editor holding final responsibility.

A bill that would have required mandatory military service for all young people ages 18 to 26 to commit two years of military service was defeated in a landslide 402-2 vote in the House of Representatives last week.

Sen. Ernest Holling, D-S.C., proposed the bill in January 2003 in conjunction with the House bill proposed by Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y. A twin bill is still sitting in the armed forces committee of the U.S. Senate, waiting to be voted upon.

Though this bill might seem somewhat farfetched, this could be the first step in a series of initiatives attempting to strengthen our military force by way of mandating service for U.S. citizens. On the forefront of President Bush and Sen. John Kerry's campaigns are repeated promises that the draft won't be reinstated. In a year filled with promises from both presidential hopefuls, the question is who, if anyone, is telling the truth when the votes of college-aged students, as well as those of their parents/families, are at stake.

Currently, our military is stretched thinly throughout several countries -- how can we be expected to quell uprisings in Afghanistan and Iraq while there are possiblities of nuclear actions from North Korea and Iran simultaneously?

Every college-age student stands to be directly affected by the precedent this particular piece of legislation has set, and subsequent pieces that may resurface in the months after the election. Yet, many people remain ignorant of the exact language in the legislation, and listen blindly to presidential campaign promises.

There will not be a draft that includes all individuals, because of the vote against this bill, but that does not mean there will not be a draft as it currently stands.

Before Sept. 11, 2001, people volunteered to join the military because it afforded an opportunity for education and a military career. The difference between then and now, however, is that no imminent danger existed in the global climate. The bill in the Senate and House proposed to level the playing field for everyone, in which every young adult would have to enter the military for a mandatory service, providing a climate of equality and fairness in the U.S. that currently doesn't exist. Sending American citizens overseas when they have no other constructive choices to better their status in life, is by its very nature un-American.

There's no guarantee as to when the battles in Afghanistan and Iraq will end.

The threat of a draft of males 18 to 25 could occur, and will not come from either of the possible presidents. The news will come from the Pentagon, when the U.S. realizes people do not usually enlist in the Army during wartime.

 


Send an Opinion Letter to the Editor about this article.


TOP  HOME
Search default: Exact phrase, not case sensitive.
Options: AND, NEAR, OR, AND NOT. Power search
Copyright © 2009 Collegian Inc.
Updated Monday, October 11, 2004  5:53:16 PM  -5
Requested Friday, November 27, 2009  6:49:48 PM  -5