House rejects tying draft to driver’s licenses

Print More
MP3

(Host) The Vermont House has rejected legislation aimed at getting young men to sign up for a potential military draft when they get a driver’s license.

Opponents argued it wasn’t the state’s job to help enforce federal law.

VPR’s John Dillon reports:

(Dillon) The debate in the House rekindled arguments from a generation ago about military service and the role of government to get people to sign up for the draft.

The legislation would have automatically registered young men for the federal Selective Service system when they get a driver’s license.

Federal law requires 18 year old males to sign up.

And Clarendon Democrat David Potter argued that it was the state’s duty to help.

(Potter) "To have the right of freedom, there’s an obligation of responsibility at all levels to do what is necessary to maintain it. And this bill really enhances that concept."

(Dillon) But Burlington Democrat Johanna Donovan said it wasn’t the state’s job to help enforce a federal law.

And she said the sign up requirement could cost the state $50,000.

(Donovan) "I, I guess, was willing to let this pass, until this discussion about freedom. But I am just absolutely shocked that we are having a discussion about responsibilities of serving our nation through a transportation bill. This is not about signing up for Selective Service. I do think it is about spending $50,000 we don’t have."

(Dillon) The bill came out of the Transportation Committee. And the panel’s chairman, Cambridge Republican Richard Westman, said Vermont has a relatively low rate of registration, with about 14 percent of young men failing to sign up.

Westman said some may not know about the requirement. And those who don’t sign up don’t qualify for federal jobs or federal student loans.

(Westman) "Whether or not you agree with Selective Service or not, is really not the question for us. Really the question for us is those young people that don’t sign up by the time they’re 26 are penalized."

(Dillon) But in the end, a majority of the House rejected the amendment. They had qualms about spending the money in a tight budget year. And they said the bill represented a serious policy change that needed further discussion by other committees.

For VPR News, I’m John Dillon in Montpelier.

Comments are closed.