Committee Opposed to Militarism and the Draft (COMD)

Articles Archive
Hits: 2982

From Draft NOtices, March-April 2002


— Rick Jahnkow
    

A Universal Military Training and Service Act (HR 3598) was proposed in the House on December 20, 2001, generating some concern about a possible draft. If passed, the legislation would require young males to report for 6-12 months of training and "education" in the military. Even conscientious objectors would be required to report for non-combat training in the military, a departure from previous drafts that allowed some war objectors to qualify for civilian alternative service.

It is important to know that the consensus among those who follow draft-related legislation is that this particular bill has very little chance of going anywhere. It is poorly designed and not something the Pentagon would want — at least, not in the short term (more on this below). Of course, its introduction may be used to promote a more viable proposal for some form of conscription in the future, and for this reason we need to express our opposition, even to this unrealistic bill. However, if we focus only on HR 3598 and ignore more immediate related developments, we will miss the real point, which is revealed in the details of the bill and the larger context into which it fits.

Articles Archive
Hits: 2970

From Draft NOtices, January-February 2002



— Rick Jahnkow
    

Another hole has been ripped open in the barrier protecting U.S. civilians from the influence of militarism. In December 2001, the U.S. House and Senate gave final approval to an education bill with a provision that severely erodes the right of local schools to control military access to campuses and personal information about students. The legislation, signed by President Bush on January 8, 2002, will go into effect soon as Public Law No: 107-110.

The military access law was part of a larger bill (H.R. 1) that provides various funds for local schools and programs to improve student performance. The bill also extends and changes programs begun under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.

Articles Archive
Hits: 3971

From Draft NOtices, January-February 2002


— Lorraine Demi
    

Since September 11, 2001, schools across the U.S. have increased the recitation of the "Pledge of Allegiance" in an effort to enforce patriotism. Previously lax policies have become mandatory in many school districts, making students feel pressured to pledge allegiance to a country and a flag regardless of their personal, religious or political beliefs.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has advised many school districts in recent years on the constitutional rights of students wishing not to pledge allegiance. When students at Mark Morris High School in Washington State chose not to participate in the school’s daily recitation of the pledge, Washington ACLU Legal Program Director Julya Hampton wrote in a 1998 letter to the school: "In response to legal challenges brought by students, the courts have uniformly upheld their right to remain quietly seated during the pledge. . . . Students should not be compelled to participate in the pledge by the symbolic act of standing, or be compelled to leave the classroom because of their peaceful expression of political beliefs."

Subscribe to...

Click HERE

 

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