U.S. Congress - H.R.5741 Universal National Service Act
H.R.5741 - Universal National Service Act
To require all persons in the United States between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform national service, either as a member of the uniformed services or in civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, to authorize the induction of persons in the uniformed services during wartime to meet end-strength requirements of the uniformed services, and for other purposes. view all titles (3)
All Bill Titles
- Official: To require all persons in the United States between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform national service, either as a member of the uniformed services or in civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, to authorize the induction of persons in the uniformed services during wartime to meet end-strength requirements of the uniformed services, and for other purposes. as introduced.
- Popular: Universal National Service Act as introduced.
- Short: Universal National Service Act as introduced.
Vote on This Bill
-
Share This Bill
More Share via Email
Sort By
Comments Feed
Displaying 31-46 of 46 total comments.
You mean like how those who WILLINGLY sign on to serve in the military are paid? Monetary appeals are moot. This is a question of personal freedoms being ignored and trampled on, yet again, at the whim of government. Funny how a man of Rangel’s age berates those who support war and oppose this bill, yet he too is safe from legislation such as this.
compulsory service levels the playing field as long as everyone has to do it. i do not believe that hawkish politicians could sell their wars as easily if every single family and household, including their own, was in service. a general draft would make anti-war critiques much more powerful and convincing because we would all be personally affected by waging war. as it stands now it is easy to brush off nay saying tree hugging pacifist stoner hippies because they don’t know anything about serving their country. a draft would mobilize a much more pervasive and respected anti-war movement extremely quickly. i wouldn’t worry about this passing congress.
at the same time you accept the benefits and protections of being a u.s. citizen you have necessarily surrendered a large chunk of your individual sovereignty to the republic and its government. nothing new to see here.
“at the same time you accept the benefits and protections of being a u.s. citizen you have necessarily surrendered a large chunk of your individual sovereignty to the republic and its government”
This is unconstitutional and sounds like something Hitler or that nut-job in Iran would say. The government is responsible for protecting its citizenry, in this country specifically, and has no right to and does not own our bodies. Suggesting otherwise is a major flaw.
Now, being a relatively reasonable person, I understand that while this ISN’T SUPPOSED to be the case, sadly, doesn’t mean that it actually is; I understand entirely what you’re saying.
Will this include illegals? They get our benefits…. just saying.
LOL
I’m almost certain the likes of Rangel and his boys would find a way to make an argument for how only the oppressive white-male majority will be affected by this bill.
This is an unnecessary bill and a waste of Congress’ time. The U.S. already has a Selective Service system for a draft to be reinstated in an emergency. The U.S. already has a multitude of volunteer programs (i.e. Peace Corps, VISTA, etc.). A two year stint in the military would be a huge waste of time and money, since an individual would just be getting to a point of being an asset to the service they would be getting out.
I didn’t see anything in the text of the bill that said a person would be paid for this service, and even if they were it would just mean more people on the government payroll.
This bill would give the President way to much power and too much latitude in how to enforce it. If you disagree with the powers that be you get sent to the front lines, you lick their boots you get a better assignment.
Wake up people this is definitely socialism in the making.
How is this bill reconciled with “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell?” You can’t pass a bill into law that requires service in the armed forces or another branch of the government (ie homeland security and what-not) and then deny gays and lesbiens the option of serving openly. As a vet, I know that I would much rather have an openly gay airman serving next to me than someone who has no desire to put their life on the line for our country and simply is serving the minimum time to meet the legal requirements. We need men and women who are serving our country for the right reasons.
For all who fail to realize it; which apparently includes Rep. Rangel, this would be involuntary servitude. Why is this such an important distinction to make you ask? Because it is Constitutionally ILLEGAL! I would like to ask Rep. Rangel to read the United States Constitution (you know, that document you swore to uphold when you took office?), specifically the Thirteenth Amendment. To help in this endeavor I’ll place it here so it is easy for you (and everyone else) to find:
“Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."
Uphold freedom from slavery, and dismiss this unconstitutional bill.
I wonder how those who work in this Three Ring Circus (Schoolhouse Rock was right) — Executive, Legistlative, and Judicial — will write themselves and their families out of this one.
This is the scary kind of insanity
29 forgot about Rangel.
εγο ειμι ο δοθλοσ
So has this died in committee? Or is it just taking a long time?
this sounds like unnecessary radical totalitarian practices being forced upon free peoples. i thought we learned our lesson in vietnam, this sounds like 5x the vietnam draft
This bill has a lot of potential.I think it should be mandatory for every American to serve his/her country at some point in their life.Two years is not that long of a time.Just look at what Woodrow Wilson did with the National Parks during his time.If we could redirect our narrow assumptions of this being a ‘slave bill’ and take a step back, we may see opportunity in this piece of legislation. How many young people do you know that would benefit from a little discipline, perspective, and responsibility?What if we provided alternative service options,i.e.Americorps, Peace Corps, Teach For America, Road Work, Park Service, etc…Many Americans walk around with this self-entitlement swagger that is completely unwarranted. Let’s put the Unity back in our name and get our hands dirty again. We are losing our craftsmanship-Take pride in what you can create. Why not instill some work ethic back in our youth? It will give them a break from all of these screens at the least.Love your Country.