A draft is a severe restriction on civil liberties, much more so than taxes, especially when the nation is not facing a national crisis. It is with good reason that the American Civil Liberties Union opposes the plan.
But, I hope lawmakers will continue to increase the oppurtunities for those who wish to serve, perhaps through a civil service G.I. bill.
There are also inherent benefits for those who serve, Hart and Torricelli point to the job skills and training disadvantaged youth may gain.
Even if this argument is so, and judging from the results of local civilian volunteer programs such as New York City's City Volunteer Corp it probably is, we cannot substitute a draft for a proper education system.
The reason minority youths cannot find jobs or read and write is because too little money is spent to teach them how. A draft won't solve this problem in our society, and it will divert our attention from the root of the problem.
BUT THE MILITARY PORTION of the universal national service program fails totally.
A peacetime military draft does not stand for public service. Rather, it is symbolic of a society which is gripped by fear. Claims that the draft would bolster our needy conventional forces miss the point that what we need to bolster during times of peace is our diplomatic and aid forces.
The first time someone tested the constitutionality of America's peacetime military draft was during the undeclared war in Vietnam. The courts at that time ruled that a draft when the nation was at peace was constitutional. Without that ruling America's involvement in Indochina would have been very limited.
The claim by Hart and Torricelli that a draft is inevitable is pessimistic. A draft is only inevitable if a war is inevitable, and neither should ever happen.
The most persuasive point those in favor of the draft make is that it would be an equalizing force on a military. Currently the military is principally composed of lower class and minority youths, they argue. And that should not be.
But for less fortunate Americans, now that the Pentagon spends more money on salaries and benefits, such as the new G.I. bill, military service has become a pragmatic way to get training and go to college.
If our nation goes to war all citizens regardless of class should participate, but now we fortunately are at peace.
But a draft would spread money so thin that needed scholarships and technical training would be limited. The universal draft may be an egalitarian tool, but it eliminates a very pragmatic tool to provide money, training, and scholarships for those who need it.
Even in Torricelli's plan there is a danger of stratification. Because people choose civil or military service and will enter military service if they don't have the skills for the civil service they choose, this system has a chance to become just as stratified.
Illiterate youths will once again be forced to turn to the Army because social programs will not accept them. Middle class and rich kids will once again have the option to avoid military service by deferring to go to law or medical school and then using those skills in an appropriate civil service.
It might get tougher to get into law school.