Login to track and rank this page.
From the 110th Congress
H.R. 393
Mandatory Military Service
Rep Rangel, Charles B.
Comments
This Bill Would Be Better.
by m00dc0ntr0l on Feb 14, 2007 9:04:05
If it gave the alternative of two years of public service in another way (e.g. peace corps, americorps). Mandatory conscription is an interesting idea, but ultimately what is the end that you're trying to achieve? Perhaps it might be better to start with the ends rather than the means.
Perhaps we wouldn't be so invasion happy
by caroday on Feb 16, 2007 14:38:10
if everyone's lives were on the line.
Who is Rangel Kidding?
by MartyHeyman on Feb 26, 2007 17:59:56
The country couldn't afford to feed and clothe and administer all this make-work. This is a program for a marxist/socialist start-up nation (like early Israel) or some threatened third-world country that needs to find something constructive for their post-adolescents to do while they figure out what to do with the rest of their lives. This is a Representative putting a fly in the soup of government.
General service, not Military service
by chadlupkes on Mar 21, 2007 13:07:21
I'd support a requirement that everyone should work in the public sector for a certain number of years, but not necessarily in the Military.
Please login to add a comment.
You must login in order to edit or comment on this page.
Latest Version
Latest Version
Summary
Calls for all Americans 18-42 to serve two years in "uniformed service or in civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security"Detail
This bill allows no deferments after the age of 20.Additional Links
CNN "Rangel calls for mandatory military service" 12.30/06
Loading...
Please login to embed videos on this page.
No action items have been added to this page yet.
Login to add action items to this bill.
