# data[].attributes.headline
What are the obstacles to the reinstating of a draft system today?

# data[].attributes.subject
What are the obstacles to the reinstating of a draft system today?

# data[].attributes.body
The draft is officially known as the selective service. Basically, this means that if we ever have a national emergency or war that the all-volunteer military can't adequately support, Congress and the president can reinstate the draft and force male citizens to serve in the military.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Supreme Court has declined to hear arguments in the case of National Coalition for Men v. Selective Service System. In doing so, it acceded to the Biden administration's wishes that it not address the question of whether women should join the millions of young men required to register each year with the Selective Service - the federal agency responsible for the draft. It will now be up to Congress to decide what, if anything, to do with the law governing registration and the draft.

As scholars of the draft, we have seen Congress grappling with the question of selective service for years. A bill to include women in the draft was introduced in 2020 after a national commission studied the issue for four years. Congress is also considering two other proposals to dismantle the entire Selective Service System.

The future of the draft, and registration for it, depends on two questions. One is about the role of women, but the bigger one is about the role of the registration itself.

A brief history of registration

Registration and the draft are not the same thing, although they are related. Registration is the process by which people identify themselves to the government as potentially eligible to be drafted to serve in the military.

In the U.S., Congress and the president must pass a law authorizing a draft, at which point the government agency known as the Selective Service System oversees the administrative process of conscription. There has not been a draft in the U.S. since 1973, when Congress allowed the existing draft authorization, conscripting men into service in the Vietnam War, to expire.

Two years later, President Gerald Ford suspended men's responsibility to register for the draft. But in 1980, after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, President Jimmy Carter reversed Ford's position, reinstating registration - though not the draft itself. Since then, all male permanent residents of the United States, both citizen and noncitizen, between the ages of 18 and 26, have been required to register and update their information with the Selective Service every time they move.

Women, who have served in every U.S. war, and legally in all combat roles since 2016, have remained exempt from this requirement; they may not even voluntarily register.

It's not really about women

Politicians and activists are rehashing the same decades-old arguments about gender stereotypes and traditional gender roles.

But women serve honorably and effectively in every military role and branch of service. The rationale used by the Supreme Court in 1981 to exclude them became moot as soon as all available positions, including combat positions, opened to women in 2016.

If registration continues, and if there ever again is a draft in the U.S., we and many others believe that women clearly deserve to share equally in the responsibility to serve and the opportunity to earn the benefits of military service.

So the real question is about how draft registration serves society, or doesn't.

Mind the civil-military gap

One common belief is that maintaining draft registration bolsters the link between civilians and soldiers, which has weakened significantly since the U.S. military became an all-volunteer force. Through the last two decades of war, only 1% of Americans have served in the military.

Some experts suggest that such a weak civilian-military connection contributes to a number of problems, including a lack of familiarity with the military, a military that is not representative of society and an unfair distribution of the human costs of war.

But the Selective Service System is not designed to address those issues. Most registrants do not give much thought to the ramifications of checking the box when they renew their drivers' licenses or register to vote. In early 2020 a viral misinformation campaign about an imminent draft led a flood of worried information-seekers to crash the Selective Service's website.

And normally, as the 2020 national report noted, the mere act of registration without any real chance of being drafted does not greatly affect people's lives.

A force for social change?

Evidence shows that registration shapes society only when it is accompanied by a draft - though not always in ways that national leaders might hope. During the Cold War draft, men factored military service into their life choices by marrying, having children, going to college or choosing professions that offered them legal deferments from the draft.

That, in turn, introduced inequities into the draft, undermining the legitimacy of the process. Men with means, especially white men, were significantly more likely to obtain a deferment than working-class men, particularly men of color.

The government seems to have learned from that experience. If the draft ever were renewed, these types of deferments would likely not be allowed.

But many more Americans reach draft-eligible age each year than the military could possibly use. Any new draft would still raise new questions about the fairness of who serves and who does not.

A mobilization mechanism?

Without the draft, registration on its own has been likened to an " insurance policy" against any future threat. Any major conflict with a great power adversary - however unlikely - would require a much larger military than the country has at present.

Registration is supposed to provide Selective Service with a list of everyone eligible to be drafted and their contact information. So registration theoretically speeds up the process of bringing hundreds of thousands of soldiers into the military. And planning is important. Failure to plan adequately for bringing large numbers of recruits into the military has made wartime mobilization complicated in the past, as in the U.K. at the start of World War I.

But it's not clear that registration as currently organized would work this way. Historically, relatively few people keep their addresses up to date, and the agency is more focused on getting men to register - not on what happens after they're on the list.

The mobilization process itself is a massive production. During World War II, more than 183,000 volunteers helped evaluate men at over 11,000 local draft and appeal boards. Every person was examined; classified as available, deferred or exempt; and then processed through the system appropriately, including considering appeals.

In 1967, during the Vietnam War, with a much smaller draft than in World War II, more than 31,000 people staffed thousands of local and appeal boards around the nation. The present system has just 11,000 volunteers identified as ready to help.

With no real way to immediately conduct a draft, it's not clear that registration serves any purpose. For one thing, 97% of registrations are handled electronically, and much of the information duplicates data already stored in other government databases, including driver's license records.

In rejecting National Coalition for Men v. Selective Service, the Supreme Court has made it clear that Congress needs to act. But as it does so, policymakers need to evaluate whether the law is able to meet its objectives. If policymakers have other goals, like improving social equity or better linking civilian life with those who serve in the military, perhaps something less abstract and less bureaucratic - and less expensive - might serve the nation better than simply adding women to the existing legislation.

[ You're smart and curious about the world. So are The Conversation's authors and editors. You can read us daily by subscribing to our newsletter.]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Congress considers future of the military draft, while Supreme Court holds off

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Supreme Court has declined to hear arguments in the case of National Coalition for Men v. Selective Service System. In doing so, it acceded to the Biden administration's wishes that it not address the question of whether women should join the millions of young men required to register each year with the Selective Service - the federal agency responsible for the draft.

# data[].attributes.headline
When was the All-Volunteer Force established? What is it?

# data[].attributes.subject
When was the All-Volunteer Force established? What is it?

# data[].attributes.body
In March 1969 Nixon established the Commission on an All-Volunteer Force (also known as the Gates Commission), which released a report in February 1970 recommending an end to the draft. On July 1, 1973, the draft law expired in the United States when Congress refused to extend it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

The movement from conscription to an all-volunteer force (AVF) was a contentious issue when it was proposed in the 1960s. However, concerns about relying on volunteers to maintain a professional military at required levels have proven to be unfounded. As this study demonstrates, a 40-year partnership between policymakers and the research community has produced not only the finest fighting force the United States has ever had but also one that is broadly representative of the American people.

In 1969, four years before the United States eliminated the draft and moved to an all-volunteer force, a member of the President's Commission on an All-Volunteer Armed Force wrote to its chairman that "while there is a reasonable possibility that a peacetime armed force could be entirely voluntary, I am certain that an armed force involved in a major conflict could not be voluntary." So far, his reservations have not been borne out. However, given the ongoing war in Iraq - with casualties rising, enlistments dropping, and a majority of the American public no longer believing that the war is worth fighting - the issue of recruiting enough volunteers to maintain the U.S. military at required levels is again relevant.

I Want You! The Evolution of the All-Volunteer Force provides a richly detailed history that begins in the 1960s, when the credibility of the draft was called into serious question, and ends in the present, when long overseas deployments and the deteriorating situation in Iraq may adversely affect the sustainability of the all-volunteer system. The author, Bernard Rostker, is a senior RAND fellow with four decades of experience as both a policy analyst and policymaker in the area of defense manpower. Drawing on a vast archive of U.S. government materials, including many recently declassified documents, he addresses the complexities of the subject by alternating chapters that describe the key historical and political events of each period with corresponding chapters that focus on the research that has been used to inform the decisionmaking process.

In the foreword to this book, former Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird observes that "the work constitutes a virtual archive of the many events, issues, facets, and fundamentals constituting the all-volunteer force. The research and documentation exceed by far, in my judgment, any prior attempts to explore this subject." Thus, it is an extremely valuable resource for scholars and students of military affairs and public administration.

Why Did the United States Move to an All-Volunteer Force (AVF)?

Although the country had conscripted its armed forces for only 35 of its 228 years - nearly all in the 20th century - the American people were generally willing to accept this practice when service was perceived as universal. However, in the 1960s, that acceptance began to erode. There were five major reasons:

Demographics. The size of the eligible population of young men reaching draft age each year was so large and the needs of the military so small in comparison that, in practice, the draft was no longer universal.

Cost. Obtaining enough volunteers was possible at acceptable budget levels.

Moral and economic rationale. Conservatives and libertarians argued that the state had no right to impose military service on young men without their consent. Liberals asserted that the draft placed unfair burdens on the underprivileged members of society, who were less likely to get deferments.

Opposition to the war in Vietnam. The growing unpopularity of the Vietnam war meant the country was ripe for a change to a volunteer force.

The U.S. Army's desire for change. The Army had lost confidence in the draft as discipline problems among draftees mounted in Vietnam.

These views were reinforced by the findings of the Gates Commission, set up in 1969 by President Richard Nixon to advise him on establishing an all-volunteer force. The commission addressed key military-manpower issues, including supply and demand, attrition and retention, and the mix of career and noncareer members in the context of management efficiency and personal equity. It concluded that the nation's interests would be better served by an all-volunteer force than by a combination of volunteers and conscripts. In 1971, President Nixon signed a new law to end the draft and put the selective service structure on standby. After a two-year extension of induction authority, the end of the draft was formally announced in January 1973.

Effective Use of Research Has Been Instrumental in Establishing the AVF

Since 1964, personnel managers have used research to help develop, implement, and sustain the AVF. The research has been policy relevant, and the mixture of different disciplines - economics, psychology, social psychology, and sociology - produced a comprehensive and credible assessment of alternative policies.

The research of the 1960s and early 1970s reassured decisionmakers that an AVF might be possible at acceptable budget outlays. In the 1970s and 1980s, various test programs demonstrated the value of advertising and the benefits of educational incentives and bonuses in encouraging enlistment. Analytical evidence supported the need to reform the compensation system. Studies of accession testing and job performance proved what now seems so logical but was once very controversial: People who score higher on standardized tests do better on the job than those who score lower. The resulting emphasis on quality attracted capable people and led to increasing professionalism within the military services. A largely unexpected consequence of moving to a professional military with better pay was the higher rate of reenlistment and a sharp increase in the size of the career force.

Since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1989 and the disappearance of the threat that had dominated national security strategy for half a century, personnel research has helped managers make the adjustments that were needed to transition the larger post-Cold War military to a smaller, more-agile, and more-engaged force.

The AVF Has Changed the Military for the Better

Since the establishment of the AVF, the quality of the force, measured by scores on standardized IQ tests, has improved. The percentage of new recruits with high school diplomas has increased. The AVF has dramatically increased the number of career personnel and increased the proficiency and professionalism of the force.

The AVF is also broadly representative of the American people. For the past 26 years, the Department of Defense has annually reported on social representation in the U.S. military. The 2004 report noted the following:

Age. The active-duty population is younger than the overall civilian sector. Forty-nine percent of the active-duty force is between the ages of 17 and 24, whereas about 15 percent of the civilian workforce falls between those ages. Similarly, officers are younger than their civilian counterparts.

Gender. Today, 15 percent of the active-duty enlisted force is female, compared with less than 2 percent when the draft ended. Sixteen percent of the officer corps is female. Despite these improvements, women are still underrepresented in the military.

Marital status. The larger career force means that the number of service members who are married has increased. Today, 49 percent of enlisted personnel are married, compared with 40 percent at the start of the AVF. Sixty-eight percent of all active-duty officers are married.

Educational level. The most recent statistics show that 92 percent of the new accessions to the active-duty force are high school graduates. The figure for the reserve components is 87 percent. This is a dramatic increase from the 1973 goal of 45 percent and today's goal of 79 percent. In addition, 95 percent of active-duty officers have baccalaureate degrees, and 38 percent have advanced degrees.

Socioeconomic status. Recruits come primarily from families in the middle or lower middle classes. The high end of the distribution is not well represented.

Race and ethnicity. In fiscal year 2002, African-Americans were slightly overrepresented among new enlisted accessions relative to the civilian population: 16 percent compared with 14 percent. However, this is considerably below the 1973 level of 28 percent. Hispanics are underrepresented, making up 16 percent of all civilians but only 11 percent of new accessions.

The Success of the AVF Depends on Four Factors

Reflecting on 30 years' experience with the AVF suggests four broad reasons for its success. The first is attention and leadership from top management. The AVF would not have come about when it did without the leadership of President Nixon. Within weeks of taking office in 1969, he began the planning process and announced the formation of the Gates Commission. Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird (under Nixon) and Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger (in the early 1980s, under President Ronald Reagan) were likewise among the senior government officials who provided strong support for the AVF. Turning to the military, Army General Maxwell Thurman is considered by many as the single most important person in the history of the AVF because he taught the Pentagon how to recruit and, by dint of personality and intellect, made the AVF concept work throughout the 1980s.

A second contributing factor is the use of quantitative analysis to test, adjust, and evaluate AVF policies. Well-designed, policy-relevant research to measure job performance and determine the optimum mix of quality and cost has resulted in the proficient and committed AVF that now serves the nation.

A DVD accompanying the book's expanded edition contains more than 2,300 primary-source documents, including thousands of pages of government memoranda, letters, staff papers, and reports. More than 1,700 of these documents are linked from citations in the electronic version of the book, allowing readers to view the actual correspondence between government officials at the highest levels in context. The DVD includes material recently declassified to support this project, memoranda between presidents and secretaries of defense, commission and staff reports, and even video. This rich legacy of documentation about the all-volunteer force provides a fascinating, behind-the-scenes look at Pentagon and White House decisionmaking.

Third is the need to develop programs for attracting the necessary type and number of recruits. The AVF's focus on quality has already been discussed here. To attract high-quality youths, the services had to develop appropriate marketing strategies and advertising programs that explained the benefits and opportunities of military service. The military learned that it had to offer money for education, bonuses to enlist in certain occupations, and enlistment tours of different lengths. It needed to develop career opportunities that had civilian relevance and were a good preparation for adulthood. The services also had to develop a professional, highly trained, and motivated recruiting staff. Finally, reenlisting the most capable members was the key to creating a truly outstanding force. Besides good pay, careerists demanded quality-of-life benefits such as good housing, child care, health benefits, family advocacy programs, and military stores. It was crucial that the services become "family friendly."

The fourth factor is adequate financial resources. The defense budget must be large enough to support pay raises that keep pace with both inflation and civilian-sector pay increases; to provide resources for advertising, recruiters, bonuses, and educational benefits; and to fund the military retirement program and quality-of-life initiatives.

What Does the Future Hold for the AVF?

Today, with nearly 160,000 troops engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan, the AVF is being tested again. Military commanders continually point to the outstanding job the force is doing in this nontraditional military conflict. Remarkably, while enlistments have fallen off, retention remains at historically high levels. There were initial fears that soldiers would not reenlist if they had to redeploy even once into combat zones. However, the Army reports that some soldiers are now completing their third and fourth tours. Through improved pay and benefits for the military, America has demonstrated that it values an AVF. Our troops have likewise demonstrated their commitment through their willingness to serve.

A final judgment on the AVF has not yet been made. Indeed, it will always be a work in progress. However, the past 30 years - and particularly the experience in Iraq and Afghanistan - demonstrate that an AVF can be sustained during both peace and war. The dual challenges of longer periods of conflict and recurring deployments are formidable. There are no guarantees of permanent success. But, so far, the AVF has proven to be a resilient institution.

Notes

[1] Crawford H. Greenewalt, memorandum to Thomas Gates, Wilmington, Delaware, December 31, 1969.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation Research brief series. RAND research briefs present policy-oriented summaries of individual published, peer-reviewed documents or of a body of published work.

This research in the public interest was supported by RAND, using discretionary funds made possible by the generosity of RAND's donors, the fees earned on client-funded research, and independent research and development (IR&D) funds provided by the Department of Defense.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Evolution of the All-Volunteer Force

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The movement from conscription to an all-volunteer force (AVF) was a contentious issue when it was proposed in the 1960s. However, concerns about relying on volunteers to maintain a professional military at required levels have proven to be unfounded.

# data[].attributes.body
The last draft call was on December 7, 1972, and the authority to induct expired on June 30, 1973.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
President Nixon signs the amendment to the Military Selective Service Act of 1967 on November 26, 1969.
On November 26, 1969, President Nixon signed an amendment to the Military Selective Service Act of 1967 that began the random selection or "draft lottery" for military conscription. Similar to past legislation regarding military drafts, the amendment was received with strong criticism from a public increasingly fatigued by the Vietnam War. However, Congress and the Nixon Administration together agreed that this temporary change in policy would allow for the government to end the draft at the earliest possible date in the future, which was a major agenda item for President Nixon.

I would say that looking to the future, while this measure will remove a great number of the inequities and particularly remove the uncertainty to which I refer, we shall not be satisfied until we finally can have the system which I advocated during the campaign of a completely volunteer armed force. We cannot move to that now because of the requirements for armed services. That is, however, our ultimate goal.

One of the most instrumental officials in Nixon's White House tasked with draft overhaul was Peter Flanigan. Along with a wide range of other duties, such as the Assistant to the President for International Economic Affairs and Executive Director of the Council on International Economic Policy, Flanigan helped execute an overhaul of the embattled Selective Service System. Flanigan seemed to have a personal obligation to improve the outdated draft system and worked tirelessly through his 5 years in the administration to end the military draft.
A September 15, 1969 memo outlining President Nixon's selective service plan.
President Nixon and Flanigan realized their goal of ending the draft in 1973. It is difficult to imagine they would have been able to accomplish this feat had the Administration (and Congress) not taken the politically difficult stance in 1969 to initiate draft change, which paved the way for ending the draft altogether within 4 years.

Upon Flanigan's exit from the White House in July 1974, President Nixon had the highest remarks for one of his most trusted aides:

While I have long known of your intention to return to private life, nevertheless, I am always reluctant to see so valued a friend and associate depart. You know of my profound admiration for your splendid achievements over the past five years, and I shall not dwell on them at length. Let me say, however, that of the many men and women who have served our Administration, few can match - and none exceed - the exceptional skills, energy and dedication you brought to your duties.

Pat joins with me in extending to Brigid and you our heartfelt good wishes for every success and happiness in the years ahead.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Path to Ending the Draft " Richard Nixon Foundation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
President Nixon signs the amendment to the Military Selective Service Act of 1967 on November 26, 1969. On November 26, 1969, President Nixon signed an amendment to the Military Selective Service Act of 1967 that began the random selection or "draft lottery" for military conscription.

# data[].attributes.headline
Why was there opposition to the draft during the Vietnam War?

# data[].attributes.subject
Why was there opposition to the draft during the Vietnam War?

# data[].attributes.body
The prevailing sentiment that the draft was unfairly administered fueled student and blue-collar American opposition to the military draft. Opposition to the war arose during a time of unprecedented student activism, which followed the free speech movement and the Civil Rights Movement.

# data[].attributes.headline
How did President Nixon amend the Military Selective Service Act of 1967 ?

# data[].attributes.subject
How did President Nixon amend the Military Selective Service Act of 1967 ?

# data[].attributes.body
On November 26, 1969, President Nixon signed an amendment to the Military Selective Service Act of 1967 that began the random selection or “draft lottery” for military conscription. ... One of the most instrumental officials in Nixon's White House tasked with draft overhaul was Peter Flanigan

# data[].attributes.headline
What is the Military Selective Service Act of 1967 ?

# data[].attributes.subject
What is the Military Selective Service Act of 1967 ?

# data[].attributes.body
The Military Selective Service Act of 1967 expanded the ages of conscription to the ages of 18 to 55. It still granted student deferments, but ended them upon either the student's completion of a four-year degree or his 24th birthday, whichever came first.

# data[].attributes.headline
How did the 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor change the Selective Training and Services Act of 1940?

# data[].attributes.subject
How did the 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor change the Selective Training and Services Act of 1940?

# data[].attributes.body
Following Japan's surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, in 1941, Congress amended the act to require all able-bodied men ages 18 to 64 to register with their local draft board for military service for the duration of World War II plus six months after. In practice, however, only men 18 to 45 were drafted

# data[].attributes.headline
What is the Selective Training and Services Act of 1940 ?

# data[].attributes.subject
What is the Selective Training and Services Act of 1940 ?

# data[].attributes.body
The Sedition Act of 1918 curtailed the free speech rights of U.S. citizens during time of war. Passed on May 16, 1918, as an amendment to Title I of the Espionage Act of 1917, the act provided for further and expanded limitations on speech.

# data[].attributes.headline
What is the Selective Service Act of 1917

# data[].attributes.subject
What is the Selective Service Act of 1917

# data[].attributes.body
In May 1917, Congress passed the Selective Service Act, which created a national draft. The act required all men ages 21 to 30 to register for military service at local polling stations. This was the first time the U.S. government had established a draft before entering a war.

# data[].attributes.headline
 Which U.S. presidents made decisions that affected the war?

# data[].attributes.subject
 Which U.S. presidents made decisions that affected the war?

# data[].attributes.body
Dwight Eisenhower, John f. Kennedy, Lyndon B Johnson, Ricardo Nixon, Gerald ford

# data[].attributes.body
20 years

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A sunny day in Ninh Thuan, Vietnam

Weather Overview

Vietnam is geographically located in the tropical zone, with the top North region on temperate zone. Therefore, its climate is not consistent throughout the country. In fact, the weather varies significantly by latitude and longitude.

Current Temps & Sky Conditions for Select Vietnam Cities
Last updated: February 03, 2022
When to go

Climate by regions

The North ( Hanoi, Halong Bay) is monsoonal with hot and rainy season from April to September and cool dry season from October to March. October and November are the best months to visit since you avoid the domestic tourist flow and also experience a more comfortable temperature and humidity compared with other months.

The Central part of Vietnam ( Hue, Da Nang and Hoi An) receives dry and hot Southwest wind which makes it strenuous for any brisk walk during the day. Closer to the beach, the level of severity reduced and the dry wind is replaced by cool ocean breeze. Because of the limited land area, central Vietnam is also most susceptible to natural disasters such as hurricane or flooding. The paradox is, it is also where most beautiful beaches lie.

The South ( Ho Chi Minh City, Nha Trang, Mui Ne) is typically hot all year round with two main seasons: rainy and dry. It is also the most predictable region in terms of weather. Summer months from May to August might not be the best time to hit the road since most tourists destinations are packed with tourists and downpours happen quite frequently.

The mountain area in Northwest and South central Vietnam see little fluctuation in weather condition. It is fairly cool all year round and a great place to escape the heat from cities. The rainy season is also from May to September. At the extreme you can see snow or flurry in December or January in Sapa.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A sunny day in Ninh Thuan, Vietnam Vietnam is geographically located in the tropical zone, with the top North region on temperate zone. Therefore, its climate is not consistent throughout the country. In fact, the weather varies significantly by latitude and longitude.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
THE 10 BEST Vietnam Bodies of Water (with Photos) - Tripadvisor

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Top Vietnam Bodies of Water: See reviews and photos of Bodies of Water in Vietnam, Asia on Tripadvisor.

# data[].attributes.body
Largest city in Vietnam