10/5/2004: Rumors of a planned military draft for the year 2005 proved themselves to be a real threat today, as emails stating that the House of Representatives would vote on HR 163 without any discussion this evening began circulating this afternoon. The bill was, as expected, defeated. It would have required every U.S. citizen and every other person residing in the country between the ages of 18 and 26 to perform a two-year period of national service, either as a member of the reserves or in a civilian capacity that promotes national defense. The bill was defeated by a vote of 402-2.

Observers believe that H.R. 163 will be defeated because Republicans will not want to be seen as voting for a draft just before the Presidential Election. The bill was introduced by progressive democrat Charles Rangel, and co-sponsored by several other progressive representatives. Statement from Republican House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. Candidates Bush and Kerry have said that they do not want to institute a new draft. Another bill to watch out for, this time in the Senate: S 89, which would require "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." It was referred to the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Organizations such as the Friends Committee on National Legislation have been following this bill from the beginning. FCNL statement before the vote. Statement from Rock the Vote and Alliance for Security | Selective Service System Website | Libertarian Party's End the Selective Service Campaign | Draft Resistance.org | Snopes.com article about the draft | The Final Call article by Min. Louis Farrakhan

Statements from Indybay Readers: 1 | 2 Report from NYC Indymedia The Unofficial Draft More articles about countering the military's recruitment efforts, and about helping people to avoid military service, are further down on Indybay's Anti-War Page