Yes, Please.

okay, I'll get around to sending it to you this week.

nobody likes a liar 

WHY didnt anyone tell me I had spelled Draft wrong in the title =p lol....  Darft...

Here we go again. Ever since the First Gulf War (1990), hardly a year goes by where we aren't inundated by rumors of re-instatement of a military draft. This year, of course, is no different, as we are in the middle of a presidential race.

Vice presidential candidate John Edwards recently publicly stated that there would be no draft under a Kerry presidency. That alludes, without actually stating it, that a draft is likely if President Bush is reelected. There is an email floating around which specifically states (without any credible evidence) that Bush is secretly planning to re-instate the draft sometime in 2005, following the elections.

Let's take a look at the real facts:

First and foremost, one must understand that the President does not have the authority to re-institute the draft. In order for a draft to be implemented, Congress would have to pass a specific law to authorize it.

What's that? You, in the back row. Could you repeat the question, please?

Oh. The email you read stated that Congress is already considering two such bills, and that the Bush administration is quietly pushing them through?

You're speaking of Senate Bill 89, introduced by Senator Ernest F. Hollings (D-SC), and House Resolution 163, introduced by Representative Charles B. Rangel (D-NY). Both bills would require two years of military service (or community service for those who are medically unqualified) for every male and female in the United States, between the ages of 18 and 26.

These are the only two "draft" legislation bills which are currently active. First and foremost, please note that both bills were authored and introduced by Democrats, not Republicans. Senator Hollings and Mr. Rangel introduced the legislation over a year ago (January 2003), as a means of protest against a potential invasion of Iraq. Congress immediately stuck them "in committee" to die (that's what Congress does with bills that have absolutely no chance of passing). The two bills have languished there, ever since, with absolutely no action being taken.

Both bills would require every single male and female between the ages of 18 and 26 to serve two years in the military (or community service). Hollings version has just 13 co-sponsors, and Rangel's bill has no support at all. Folks, these bills have ZERO chances of passing. More about this idiocy, later.

There are no other draft-related bills currently pending. None. Zero, Nada, Zippo.

Any more questions about these bills? No? Good, let's continue. The Bush Administration has stated over and over and over again that they have no plans to re-institute a draft, that they don't think a draft is necessary, and they don't believe a draft would even be effective with the type of military we have today. Ladies and gentlemen, they couldn't have made their views any clearer. The current administration is against a draft. It's that simple.

I may have gotten the link wrong when I put it in.