According to www.congress.gov ( http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:H.R.163: ) (yes, including the ":"), this is Rangel's bill. Note the date it was introduced. The entire point is to make those most likely to start a draft NOT likely to, as they'd be unable to exempt their own near-and-dear. It's dead in committe and has been for over a year.
H.R.163 Title: To provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons in the United States, including women, 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. Sponsor: Rep Rangel, Charles B. [NY-15] (introduced 1/7/2003) Cosponsors (14) Related Bills: S.89 Latest Major Action: 2/3/2003 House committee/subcommittee actions. Status: Executive Comment Requested from DOD.
And yes, S.89 is just as old and just as dead. S.89 Title: A bill to provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons in the United States, including women, 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. Sponsor: Sen Hollings, Ernest F. [SC] (introduced 1/7/2003) Cosponsors (None) Related Bills: H.R.163 Latest Major Action: 1/7/2003 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
(Rangel's black, democrat, urban and liberal. If a draft is started, his constituents are 1st in line for becoming cannon fodder.)
As for registration for the draft, I'm fine with 2 choices: Noone or Everyone. The current situation is unacceptable.
JB, who registered for the draft in 1985 as close to That Building Down On Whitehall St. as he could, more or less. (Might have been at Canal St. Station, maybe someplace else.)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2004-05-27 10:15 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-05-27 11:23 am (UTC)Do your research, boy...
(As I said to
According to www.congress.gov (
http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:H.R.163: ) (yes, including
the ":"), this is Rangel's bill. Note the date it was introduced. The
entire point is to make those most likely to start a draft NOT likely to,
as they'd be unable to exempt their own near-and-dear. It's dead in
committe and has been for over a year.
H.R.163 Title: To provide for the common defense by requiring that all
young persons in the United States, including women, 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. Sponsor:
Rep Rangel, Charles B. [NY-15] (introduced 1/7/2003) Cosponsors
(14) Related Bills: S.89 Latest Major Action: 2/3/2003 House
committee/subcommittee actions. Status: Executive Comment Requested from
DOD.
And yes, S.89 is just as old and just as dead. S.89 Title: A bill to
provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons in the
United States, including women, 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. Sponsor: Sen Hollings, Ernest
F. [SC] (introduced 1/7/2003) Cosponsors (None) Related Bills:
H.R.163 Latest Major Action: 1/7/2003 Referred to Senate committee.
Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
(Rangel's black, democrat, urban and liberal. If a draft is started, his
constituents are 1st in line for becoming cannon fodder.)
As for registration for the draft, I'm fine with 2 choices: Noone or
Everyone. The current situation is unacceptable.
JB, who registered for the draft in 1985 as close to That Building Down
On Whitehall St. as he could, more or less. (Might have been at Canal St.
Station, maybe someplace else.)