Dear Mr. Rhinehart:

Thank you for contacting me regarding discussion on reinstating the draft. I appreciate the opportunity to learn your views on this matter.

The recent calls for additional troops in Iraq has fueled misconceptions that the United
States will need to reinstate the draft to perform its military missions. America has had an experienced, all-volunteer force (AVF) since July 1973, when legislation was enacted to abolish the military draft. Today, U.S. troops are re-enlisting at rates that exceed the retention goals set by the Pentagon.

I do not believe the draft should be reinstated - and there is no serious debate in Congress on the issue. Military strength increases can be achieved through the existing recruitment and retention system.

Under a draft, recruitment and training costs would soar, since turnover would be much higher than under an AVF. During the last draft, about 90 percent of all draftees quit following their initial two years of service. It is not prudent to spend time and dollars to train individuals who have no desire to remain in the military - especially considering the detrimental impact that conscription would have on troop morale.

This does not mean we can ignore the current force needs of our military, however.

Although America's military remains strong under the stress of large-scale deployments in the global war on terrorism, current manpower is inadequate to meet and fulfill the missions of our Armed Forces. For example, the Army should be increased by at least two full divisions; the Navy is lacking the ships it needs to meet security commitments. If we are serious about winning the war on terror, we must support our mission with enough manpower to get the job done right.

On May 20, 2004, the House of Representatives passed the FY '05 Defense authorization bill (H.R. 4200) by a vote of 391-34. I voted for this legislation, which would increase the number of military personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan over the next three years by adding:

- 30,000 more active Army personnel;
- 9,000 more active Marine Corps personnel; and
- 1,500 more active reservists.

At the same time, H.R. 4200 would enhance military benefits for are troops with 3.5 percent across-the-board pay raise for members of the armed forces; an increase in hardship duty pay from $300 to $750 per month; up to $3,000 per month in income replacement payments for reservists who experience a reduction in their income while away from their civilian jobs; and $9.9 billion for troop and family housing, medical facilities, and schools for Department of Defense dependents. This is the least we can do for those who are willing to wear the nation's uniform.

Again, thanks for contacting me. Feel free to contact me again, on any issue of importance to you.

Sincerely,

/s/

LEE TERRY
Member of Congress
11640 Arbor Street, Suite 100
Omaha, NE 68144
Phone: 402-397-9944
http://leeterry.house.gov

Subject: Twin Bills S 89 and HR 163

Please do not vote for these bills. There is no need to send our men to
fight in a war that should have never been started. We already have had
too many casualties, by "volunteer soldiers". This is a war (Iraq) that
we had no reason to be in, other then to make our president look good.
Ok, we got Saddam out of power but who is to say that as soon as we leave
the country another dictator will not move in and take over where he left
off. There are countries in the world that can not function under our form
of government and I believe Iraq to be one. Bring our men and women home
and let the world stand on its own, we have more important issues to be
handled on the home front then to be playing big brother to the world. In
closing if you pass these bills you will have lost my support and I will
encourage others to not re-elect you. If these bills do not pass and your
helped vote them down then I will be incline to support you in the future.
Thank you for taking the time to hear the concerns of a voter.

Sincerely,

Me

__________________________________________________________________

Pending Draft Legislation Targeted for Spring 2005
The Draft will Start in June 2005.

There is pending legislation in the House and Senate (twin bills: S 89 and HR 163) which will time the program's initiation so the draft can begin at early as Spring 2005 -- just after the 2004 presidential election. The administration is quietly trying to get these bills passed now, while the public's attention is on the elections, so our action on this is needed immediately.

$28 million has been added to the 2004 Selective Service System (SSS) budget to prepare for a military draft that could start as early as June 15, 2005. Selective Service must report to Bush on March 31, 2005 that the system, which has lain dormant for decades, is ready for activation. Please see website: www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html to view the sss annual performance plan - fiscal year 2004.

The pentagon has quietly begun a public campaign to fill all 10,350 draft board positions and 11,070 appeals board slots nationwide.. Though this is an unpopular election year topic, military experts and influential members of congress are suggesting that if Rumsfeld's prediction of a "long, hard slog" in Iraq and Afghanistan [and a permanent state of war on "terrorism"] proves accurate, the U.S. may have no choice but to draft.

Congress brought twin bills, S. 89 and HR 163 forward this year, http://www.hslda.org/legislation/na...s89/default.asp entitled the Universal National Service Act of 2003, "to provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons [age 18--26] in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes." These active bills currently sit in the committee on armed services.

Dodging the draft will be more difficult than those from the Vietnam era.

College and Canada will not be options. In December 2001, Canada and the U.S. signed a "smart border declaration," which could be used to keep would-be draft dodgers in. Signed by Canada's minister of foreign affairs, John Manley, and U.S. Homeland Security director, Tom Ridge, the declaration involves a 30-point plan which implements, among other things, a "pre-clearance agreement" of people entering and departing each country. Reforms aimed at making the draft more equitable along gender and class lines also eliminates higher education as a shelter. Underclassmen would only be able to postpone service until the end of their current semester. Seniors would have until the end of the academic year.

Even those voters who currently support US actions abroad may still object to this move, knowing their own children or grandchildren will not have a say about whether to fight. Not that it should make a difference, but this plan, among other things, eliminates higher education as a
shelter and includes women in the draft.

The public has a right to air their opinions about such an important decision.

Please send this on to all the friends, parents, aunts and uncles, grandparents, and cousins that you know. Let your children know too -- it's their future, and they can be a powerful voice for change!

Please also contact your representatives to ask them why they aren't telling their constituents about these bills -- and contact newspapers and other media outlets to ask them why they're not covering this important story.