In order to maintain a highly-trained, professional force, the military has tightened up enlistment standards during the past 30 years.
No longer are judges allowed to tell someone, "Join the military or go to jail" (the military is not allowed to accept such applicants). Those with criminal offenses, even as juveniles, require a hard-to-get waiver.
Those with a history of drug abuse (other than minor experimentation with marijuana) are ineligible for enlistment. There are hundreds of medical conditions (either current, or past history of) that render one ineligible to join our armed forces. Without a high school diploma or GED, one is ineligible to join, and -- only about 10 to 15 percent each year can have GEDs.
All of these increased standards, along with unsurpassed technology, have made the United States Military the most powerful military in the World (no other country's military even comes close). If we were to re-instate the draft, and the military was forced to accept everyone, regardless of criminal/drug/medical/test score qualifications, we would be larger, but much, much less effective. It's not numbers that count. It's training and technology.
Lock two people in a room the size of a football field, one armed with 100 rocks, and the other, an expert, professionally-trained and motivated sharpshooter, armed with a precision rifle and three rounds of ammunition. Who is likely to come out alive?
Mandatory Public Service. I often hear individuals state that everyone should serve a term in the U.S. Military. Such individuals feel it's possible to force someone to be patriotic (we proved this false during the Vietnam draft-era). While I personally think that a term of military service would benefit most of our youths, mandated military service or public service is not a good idea. The purpose of the military is to "kill people and break things" --to be the best fighting force possible (there is nothing more useless than a second-best military). It's not the purpose of our armed forces to provide a "learning experience," or "maturing experience" for our Nation's youth. If that's the goal, create some other kind of program -- but leave our Nation's defense out of it. You can't force patriotism on someone. Most military personnel I know would rather serve alongside someone who has volunteered to be there, not some small percentage of the population dragged there by threat of prison.
Police officers and firemen also perform an extremely valuable public service, and are necessary to the safety of our nation. So, why don't we consider drafting people, against their wills, to supplement those forces? Why do some of us feel its perfectly justified to conscript non-volunteers into our military, but not other areas of important public service? Would you want a non-volunteer patrolling the streets to protect you from crime, or responsible to try and save your burning house? Of course not. So why would one want a non-volunteer to fight our wars and protect our National Security?
Crunching the Numbers. Back to the two pieces of legislation I mention at the beginning of this article: Remember, both bills would have required military service (or community service for those who don't medically qualify for military service) for everyone between the ages of 20 and 26. We'll forget about the ridiculous 2006 version which would require mandatory service for everyone between the ages of 18 and 42).
According to the Selective Service, there are currently 11 million men eligible for the draft in that age-range (18 to 26). However, the bills applied to women as well, so about 22 million would be required to serve. Keep in mind that these bills did not just require a portion of them to be drafted, they required everyone to serve.
With all due respect to the good senator and representative, they were full of it when they introduced the legislation, and they knew it. There is absolutely no way this country could afford a military with 22 million people serving. Rangel and Hollings introduced the legislation to make a political point (they are against the war in Iraq), not because they think the bills have any chance of passing. Those bills couldn't pass, and the congressmen knew it, and are doing nothing more than wasting legislative time. Let's do some simple arithmetic:
