Here’s the lead-in:
To provide for the common defense by requiring all persons in the United States, including women, between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes.
-from the current PDF version of the
Universal National Service Act of 2006, Introduced as HR4752 by Charles Rangel
If a rose by any other name would smell as sweet, then the draft by any other name is still a draft, right? Call it the Universal National Service Act if you like, but for me, “draft” is just a whole lot easier and straight-forward, don’t you think?
The link, above is a 12-page PDF file that contains all the details of the proposed bill. Rather than pontificating what I think you should think, please read it for yourself and decide with your own conscience.
One interesting comment I found elsewhere says this: “This Act if passed will Usurp the Governor’s State Militia and the U.S. Constitutional ‘Unregulated Militia’ (We the People), acting for ourselves. It will place ‘all’ under the President!” (Scott Charles Vaught on ItsHappeningHere blog)
Back in March I posted on a related topic: Uncle Sam wants 25% of 17-24 year olds in the Army.
Thanks to Maurice Reeves of MauriceReeves.com for the tip on this issue!
7 responses so far ↓
1 chow-stl // Jun 6, 2006 at 1:52 pm
Charles Rangel has been a class warfare expert for quite some time now. A proponent of the debunk theory that only the most desperately poor are exploited by the military for service and this legislation is an attempt to give some traction to that angle of the lefts anti-military agenda. Its and electoin year, he is from new york, so he has to engage in a legislativly meaningless publicity stunt to keep he moonbat constituents sufficiciantly amused enough to gain re-election.
Best Regards.
2 Maurice // Jun 6, 2006 at 1:58 pm
Thanks for the tip of the hat Rich. Chow’s right. This has been proposed by Charles Rangel before, in 2003, as a way to sway public opinion away from war, but I find it a strange tactic, and a dangerous one as well. I also find it a little frustrating that people point to this being somehow a Bush Administration ploy (and anyone that knows me knows I RARELY defend this administration).
But regardless, I hope it gets shredded in public and I really hope that Rangel gets spanked by his voters for this crap.
3 julie // Jun 7, 2006 at 4:26 pm
Good thing that Sec. 8 (Conscientious Objector) clause is still there. I think this is actually a
plea, or call to action if you will, to get millions of Americans (legal or otherwise) to suddenly
proclaim their disgust with our morally bankrupt administration, and refuse to serve due to their
moral, religious or ethical beliefs.
4 Carol Lankston // Jun 17, 2006 at 3:48 pm
Thank you for this information. I heard it discussed by a guest on
Dave Glover’s program (550am-St. Louis) and he made fun of the guest
saying this wasn’t true. I felt the guest knew what he was talking
about or he would not have mentioned it. Therefore, while looking
for a site regarding HR4752 I found yours. I am passing this along
to friends and family who will be effected by this bill.
5 Richard // Jun 18, 2006 at 7:32 pm
Hi, Carol. Glad you found my site. Hope the information is helpful and hope to see you around these parts again soon!
6 MikeG // Oct 11, 2006 at 2:12 am
But what is the latest action on this bill? Has it been voted on? Will it pass last minute 2006 session? Yes, this type of bill is a call to arms. And yet … quite an odd election year tactic.
7 Richard // Oct 12, 2006 at 4:53 pm
Hi, MikeG. Thanks for asking about the status of this bill. At the time I’m writing this reply the current status of the bill is “Introduced”. It has been submitted to the House Armed Services committee for consideration of whether to submit the bill to the House for consideration. You can see its status at http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-4752.
I appreciate your interest in this important matter.
Leave a Comment