Committee Opposed to Militarism and the Draft (COMD)

Articles Archive
Hits: 3148

From Draft NOtices, July-September 2007

 



—Jorge Mariscal
    

    "The Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors, or DREAM, provision in the immigration bill is expected to help boost military recruiting.” − Bill Carr, Acting Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Military Personnel Policy

    "I've been here almost eight years. I feel like I belong to this country," he said. "People like me, we want to serve the country. We love this country. We don't have papers. We can't afford to go to college. The military is the perfect option for us.” − Sebastián, undocumented student from Mexico

In early June, a two-pronged media cycle dealing with the issue of non-citizen soldiers and military recruitment slowly began to materialize. Following on the heels of an internal Pentagon study that reported a general decrease in interest in military service among young Americans, the debate about the role of non-citizens in the U.S. military intensified.

In the Washington Post, reporter Brigid Schulte filed a feature story titled, “Why Won't We Let Them Fill the Ranks?”, in which she described the willingness of many undocumented youth to enlist. Schulte’s piece is filled with enthusiastic comments from undocumented youth who are eager to sign up.

At one point, she depicts a group of undocumented workers cheering as the invasion of Iraq begins, apparently because the war would afford them the opportunity to enlist.

Articles Archive
Hits: 4469

From Draft NOtices, July-September 2007

 


—Rick Jahnkow
    

Another attempt is being made to boost draft registration compliance in California by enlisting the aid of the Department of Motor Vehicles. On February 23, Assembly Bill 1661 was introduced in the state legislature to require the DMV to add a special notice about registering with the Selective Service System on the form used to apply for a driver’s license or state identification card. The notice would advise male applicants that they are required to register with the federal Selective Service System at age 18 and describe the various possible consequences for failing to comply. The applicant would also be offered an opportunity to have the information in his license/ID application form used to register him with Selective Service.

In recent years, Selective Service and its supporters have been seeking to convince states to make draft registration a condition for receiving a driver’s license. Most states have passed laws to implement such a requirement, but California, which may have the largest number of nonregistrants in the nation, has declined to pass three such proposals.

To reduce resistance this time, the proposal was watered down so that it doesn’t make draft registration a condition for receiving a license or DMV-issued ID card, but it would still serve to aggressively promote registration and involve the DMV in the registration process. It was introduced by Assembly Member Paul Cook (Rep.), along with Assembly Member Bill Maze (Rep.) as the principal co-author. Other co-authors are Assembly Members Arambula (Dem.), Parra (Dem.), and Villines (Rep.), and Senators Correa (Dem.) and Runner (Rep.).

On April 19, the bill passed the Assembly Transportation Committee by a vote of 13-0 and was scheduled for consideration by the Assembly Appropriations Committee on May 2. The Appropriations Committee legislative analyst pointed out in his pre-hearing report that the bill violated the state constitution, which prohibits the use of Motor Vehicle Account funds for any uses that are not vehicle-related. In this case, some of those funds would be used to process information for the federal Selective Service System.

Articles Archive
Hits: 2934

From Draft NOtices, July-September 2007

 



—Michelle Gutiérrez
    

The Christian right’s move to erode the landmark decision in Roe v. Wade as generated critique and fear by many. The 1973 Supreme Court decision gave women the right to terminate pregnancy in the pre-viable state by banning state laws that prohibited abortion. Since then, stipulations on abortion have been made on the state level, but generally Roe v. Wade has made tangible improvements in women’s reproductive choices and safety nationwide. Back alley abortions seemed to be a thing of the past. But, with the composition of the Supreme Court changing and a resurgence of “pro-life” advocacy, a ban on late-term abortion has passed and many states are debating the circumstances in which minors can have access to an abortion. Many women indeed fear that we’re heading back to the days when women’s reproductive choices will include a coat hanger and going to an unsafe abortion facility. But, if we are alarmed by the encroachment on women’s reproductive rights, we should pause and think about a population of Americans who have not been able to benefit from the Roe v. Wade decision at all. For women associated with the military, either as spouses or soldiers, there aren’t many reproductive choices to erode.

Women in most societies contend with gender inequality and inequality based on sex and sexuality, but for women in the military, much of this is experienced ten-fold. While there is sexism in civilian society, for female soldiers there is a greater threat of harassment and rape. Furthermore, if abused, women must make their way through hierarchies and bureaucracy that can make reporting abuses sometimes futile or even detrimental to one’s career and even safety.  The “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy makes things even more difficult for both straight women and lesbians in the military, since accusations of being lesbian are sometimes used as leverage for men who make unwanted sexual advances on women. For civilian women married to men in the military, there are other challenges: the constant moves, raising families alone, fear, worry, limited time to establish one’s own career, loneliness and isolation. And of course, there is greater incidence of family violence and abuse. Put simply, women associated with the military have it hard, even harder than women in civilian society.

Draft NOtices

Quarterly print newsletter

Subscribe now Learn more

 

Ninth CIRCUIT COURT RULING: CONFRONTING MILITARISM BY USING EQUAL ACCESS TO HIGH SCHOOLS

When the military comes to your local high school, you have a legal right to give students an opposing view. This has been the position taken by federal district courts in Florida, Pennsylvania and Illinois and two federal appellate courts. The most broadly-worded decision came from a case that COMD took to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the 1980s. Here is the background:

Find Out More | Download PDF