MILITARY LAW TASK FORCE (MLTF) STATEMENT ON THE DRAFT
MILITARY LAW TASK FORCE
National Lawyers Guild
318 Ortega Street
San Francisco, CA 94122
415-566-3732 * mlhiken@mltf.info
PRESS RELEASE
For Immediate Release
Date: 12-5-06
Contact:
Ed Hasbrouck
edward@hasbrouck.org
415-824-0214
David Gespass
205-323-5966
thepasss@aol.com
MILITARY LAW TASK FORCE (MLTF) STATEMENT ON THE DRAFT
Representative Charles B. Rangel has called for a return to military conscription on the theory that it would be a lesser evil than the current "poverty draft."
"I don't see how anyone can support the war and not support the draft," Rangel says. Like the majority of Americans, the MLTF also opposes both the wars(s) and the draft; however, rather than find ways to force the unwilling to fight unpopular wars, we should find ways to end or withdraw from those wars.
We share Rangel's concern for the targeting of the poor and people of color by military recruiters. It is a symptom of social failure that for many people, joining the armed forces seems like the only path to financial security and a sense of self-worth. But we appeal to Rangel to focus his attention on recruiting practices and on alternatives to militarism, rather than enlarging the pool of those subject to the abuses of the military.
Congressional leaders claim there is no chance of a draft, but they continue to authorize and fund draft registration and the Selective Service System. We call on Speaker-elect Pelosi to preempt Rangel's bill by bringing to a vote legislation to end draft registration and abolish the Selective Service System. History demonstrates that a society is willing to fight and defend itself when actually threatened by outside forces; no system of conscription survives wars of aggression.
Rangel's proposal highlights the importance of continued resistance to draft registration and continued readiness by young people, health care and other workers in demand by the U.S. military, to resist any draft.
When draft registration was reinstated in 1980, following a five- year hiatus, more than a million potential draftees opted out by boycotting the initial mass registration periods. The rate of compliance with draft registration declined from there, even when a handful of the most vocal resisters were singled out and convicted on the basis of their public statements.
Non-registrants came to learn that only those who spoke out would be, or could be, prosecuted, and that the government was powerless to round up the millions of people who were violating the law. Mass nonviolent direct action provides substantial safety in numbers for draft and registration resisters.
Throughout the quarter-century since then, resistance to draft registration has been sustained -- almost entirely by spontaneous individual action -- at levels far exceeding the resistance to the draft at the peak of the Vietnam War.
Most of those who register do so only in order to qualify for student loans or jobs, and many of them would resist if drafted. Compliance with the requirement to notify the Selective Service System of address changes is next to nil. Most registrants have effectively "unregistered" by moving without telling the SSS where they have gone, and most induction notices would end up in the dead letter office. That will make it even harder for the government to try to crack down on those who haven't registered, or who refuse to report for induction.
In the unlikely event that a non-registrant is arrested for failure to register, the government must prove to a jury that the defendant received actual notice of what (s)he was supposed to do. This is the main reason that the attempt to enforce draft registration was limited to a small subset of those who had informed the government of their deliberate refusal to register, and was completely abandoned more than 20 years ago.
The question is not whether anyone "wants" a draft, or believes it might become "necessary." The question is whether a draft is possible, and the answer provided by the history of more than 25 years of continuing massive noncompliance with Selective Service registration is, "No." While it is obvious that there is now a different administration and Supreme Court than previously, a move to incarcerate hundreds, if not thousands, of draft-age citizens seems a misguided pro-war pipe-dream.
We congratulate those in the past who have opposed draft registration for their steadfast, spontaneous, and courageous defiance of the government's campaign of lies, empty threats, show trials, and intimidation.
We encourage health care workers, and others with special skills currently in demand by the military, to educate themselves, organize, and prepare to resist any activation of the Health Care Personnel Delivery System or any other form of "special skills" draft.
We remind draft resisters not to talk to the FBI or other government agents, not to make any statements admitting knowledge or violations of the law, and not to accept any notices from the government, without first consulting a knowledgeable attorney or counselor or without understanding the potential implications.
The MLTF will use every resource available to us to defend the rights of those who refuse to participate in war.