Incentives & Inequities

THE DRAFT

"It's easy to make changes," sighed Louisiana's Democratic Congressman F. Edward Hebert. "But what changes?" As the House Armed Services Committee ended the first phase of its inquiry into the draft last week, that enigma was as far as ever from solution.

There was no dearth of suggestions during the two-week hearings, ranging from Lieut. General Lewis B. Hershey's insistence that selective service be left intact to proposals that the draft give way to a totally voluntary system with higher pay as the incentive to serve. A World War II-style lottery was the most popular proposal, with Massachusetts' Democratic Senator Teddy Kennedy its foremost advocate. A more intriguing solution was offered by New York's Democratic Congressman Otis Pike: eligible men should be allowed the choice of being drafted for three years or enlisting for two, the reverse of present practice.

First to Be Netted. What stirred most curiosity was a Defense Department manpower study completed a year ago but shelved because of the Viet Nam war, until persistent pressure from Congress forced its release last week. The report offered no major departure, let alone any reform as radical as Defense Secretary McNamara's recent proposal for a whole new system of universal service, either military or civilian, as an answer to the draft's "inequity." Indeed, the report defended the present system as "basically sound."

Its principal criticism was that the oldest men in the current pool of eligibles--26-year-olds, "those who are the most settled in their careers"--are now the first to be inducted. Instead, said the report, 19-and 20-year-olds should be tapped first, noting that "combat commanders prefer the younger age group." All who wanted to stay in school would be granted deferments until they graduated or dropped out of college or certain graduate studies, most notably medical school. At that time, they would join 19-and 20-year-olds in the "priority category." As for an all-volunteer force, the Pentagon estimated that the cost would be prohibitive: $4 billion to $17 billion in extra salaries and other blandishments each year to maintain 2,700,000 servicemen, the pre-Viet Nam level.

Gingerly Respect. The Pentagon report treated the prickly problem of precisely how men should be selected--whether by local draft boards or lottery or what--with gingerly respect. "These are matters beyond our responsibility," said Assistant Defense Secretary Thomas Morris, who testified on the report before the committee. With elections coming up in November and major sections of the present selective-service law due to expire a year hence, the House Armed Services Committee probably wishes it could say the same.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.