The Case For NOT Reinstating the Military Draft
After September 11, 2001, there has been a slight increase in the number of people that have joined the armed forces, but some fear that this is still not enough. As a result, many are asking, "What about the draft?" It may seem relic of wars past and administrations gone by, but in the aftermath of the Iraq war, it could become a reality. Would this be a wise choice? Does it really make sense to reinstate a draft, which tore the country apart in the Vietnam era, when the volunteer army has on the whole been outstandingly successful for a generation? More importantly, the draft would cause more harm that good and would not solve any of the issues that have made Congress mention reenacting it in the first place.
As a matter of principle, the military draft raises issues with respect to the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which forbade involuntary servitude. This amendment was designed to outlaw slavery, and the courts have historically regarded it as not preventing a military draft. The draft might be regarded as a civic obligation, in some sense analogous to jury duty. Clearly there is no real comparison to jury duty, and even if we are to admit a draft as constitutional, it certainly violates the spirit of the 14th Amendment, to be avoided unless there is utterly and absolutely no alternative.
As a practical matter, there is no indication that we have reached the extremity where a draft would be an acceptable option, and many reasons why a draft would not be a practical or effective solution to current or foreseeable shortfalls in voluntary military recruitment. Historically, the draft originated in an age of mass armies. These were "warm body" armies, in which the level of training of most soldiers, and the initiative expected of them, were both minimal. Since the end of the draft in the 1970s, however, the American military has been transformed
...