DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
OFFICE OF FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
1155 DEFENSE PENTAGON
WASHINGTON, DC 20301-1155

 

Ref: 17-F-l455

Gregory Korte

USA Today

1575 I Street NW

Suite 350

Washington, DC 20005

Dear Mr. Korte:

This responds to your August 10, 2017 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, a
copy of which is attached for your convenience. We received your request on August 10, 2017,
and assigned it case number l7-F-l455. We ask thapt you use this number when referring to
your request.

The Of?ce of the Under Secretary for Personnel and Readiness, a component of the
Of?ce of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), conducted a search of their records systems and
located the enclosed document, totaling 40 pages, determined to be responsive to your request.
This information is appropriate for release in its entirety, without excision.

This constitutes a full grant of your request, and closes your case ?le in this office. There
are no assessable fees associated with this response.

I trust that this information fully satis?es your request. If you need further assistance or
would like to discuss any aspect of your request, please do not hesitate to contact the Action
Of?cer assigned to your request, Bethlehem Addis, at bethlehem.addis.civ@mail.mil or
(571) 372-0424. Our FOIA Public Liaison, Jim Hogan, is also available to assist you and may be
reached at (571) 372-0462.

Sincerely,
fr Stephanie L. Carr
Chief

Enclosures:
As stated

REPORT ON THE PURPOSE AND UTILITY
OF A REGISTRATION SYSTEM
FOR MILITARY SELECTIVE SERVICE

Office of the Under Secretary of Defense
for Personnel and Readiness

The estimated cost of this report for the Department of Defense is approximately $51,000 in

Fiscal Years 2016-2017. This includes $0 in expenses and $51,000 in DoD labor.
Generated on 2017Mar17; RefID: F-FE1E85C

 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Background. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
The Selective Service System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
The SSS maintains a registration structure and database
ready for immediate use in in the event of a national emergency. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
The SSS regularly trains and exercises personnel and systems to
ensure readiness to execute a draft. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Actions Attending the Execution of a Draft. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Figure 1: Structure of the Selective Service System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Benefits Derived from the Military Selective Service System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Direct Benefits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
The military selective service system guarantees the
certain and timely fulfillment of military manpower
requirements in a national emergency. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
The selective service registration database provides
valuable military recruiting leads. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Indirect Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Registration reminds America’s youth of the importance of
Military, National, and Public Service. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Military selective service is a link between the AVF and society at large. . . . . . . 12
Military selective service is a symbol of national will and a
deterrent to potential enemies of the United States. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
The Extent to which Expanding Registration to Include Women
would Impact the Benefits of the Military Selective Service System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Direct Benefits Potentially Associated with Expanding Registration to Women . . . . . . 17
The military selective service system guarantees the
certain and timely fulfillment of military manpower
requirements in a national emergency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
The selective service registration database provides
valuable military recruiting leads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

i

 Indirect Benefits Potentially Associated with Expanding Registration to Women. . . . . 18
Registration reminds America’s youth of the importance of
Military, National, and Public Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Military selective service is a link between the AVF and society at large . . . . . . .18
Military selective service is a symbol of national will and a
deterrent to potential enemies of the United States. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
An Additional Benefit Potentially Associated with
Expanding Registration to Women . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19
The registration of women would promote fairness and equity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Additional Resource Requirements to Register Women . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Functions Currently Performed by the SSS that Would Be Assumed
by DoD in the Absence of a National Registration Capability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20
Systems, Manpower, and Facilities Needed by DoD to Mobilize Inductees
in the Absence of the SSS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Manpower. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Facilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Feasibility and Utility of Eliminating the Current Focus on Mass
Mobilization of Primarily Combat Troops in Favor of a System
that Focuses on Mobilization of Military Occupational Specialties. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25
Mobilization of General Combat Forces. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Mobilization by Military Occupational Specialties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
DoD Manpower Needs in the Event of an Emergency
Requiring Mass Mobilization. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Timeline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Figure 2: Notional Timeline for Mobilization. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Additional Critical Skills Needed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Assumptions Used by the Department. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

ii

 Introduction
Section 552 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY)
2017 requires the Secretary of Defense to submit a report and on the current and future need for a
centralized registration system under the Military Selective Service Act (MSSA) 1, to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives and the National
Commission on Military, National, and Public Service, for the purposes of assisting the
Commission in carrying out its duties. The law further requires that the report include:
•

A detailed analysis of the current benefits derived, both directly and indirectly, from
the Military Selective Service System, including:
o The extent to which mandatory registration benefits military recruiting;
o The extent to which a national registration capability serves as a deterrent to
potential enemies of the United States;
o The extent to which expanding registration to include women would impact these
benefits.

•

An analysis of the functions currently performed by the Selective Service System that
would be assumed by the Department in the absence of a national registration
capability.

•

An analysis of the systems, manpower, and facilities that would be needed by the
Department to physically mobilize inductees in the absence of the Selective Service
System.

•

An analysis of the feasibility and utility of eliminating the current focus on mass
mobilization of primarily combat troops in favor of a system that focuses on
mobilization of all military occupational specialties, and the extent to which such a
change would impact the need for both male and female inductees.

•

A detailed analysis of the Department’s manpower needs in the event of an
emergency requiring mass mobilization, including:
o A detailed timeline, along with the factors considered in arriving at this timeline,
of when the Department of Defense (DoD) would require:
 the first inductees to report for service;
 the first 100,000 inductees to report for service; and
 the first medical personnel to report for service.
o An analysis of any additional critical skills that would be needed in the event of a
national emergency, and a timeline for when the Department would require the
first inductees to report for service.

•

A list of the assumptions used by the Department when conducting its analysis in
preparing the report.

1

50 USC 3801, et seq. [hereinafter MSSA]. The Military Selective Service Act (MSSA), first enacted as the
Selective Service Act of 1948, establishes the Selective Service System (SSS) as an independent federal agency,
responsible for delivering appropriately qualified civilian men for induction into the Armed Forces of the United
States, as authorized by Congress.

1

 Background
Throughout most of the 20th century, the laws of the United States have obligated male
citizens and residents to register for a draft administered by an agency of the federal
government. 2 Beginning with the Civil War and continuing through the Vietnam conflict, the
federal government has episodically used draft calls and lotteries to mobilize military manpower
for the Armed Forces. On June 30, 1973, statutory induction authority expired 3 and in April
1975, then-President Gerald Ford temporarily suspended the registration requirement. 4 The
MSSA had not been repealed, however, and even as the military transitioned to the AllVolunteer Force (AVF), there remained in effect the requirement for a system and process ready
to provide untrained manpower to the Armed Forces in the event of mass mobilization. 5
In stark contrast to the “hollow force” of the post-Vietnam years, today’s U.S. military is
universally considered to be the most powerful and capable in the world. Since its establishment
in 1973, the AVF has proven its mettle in missions worldwide. In the face of repeated combat
deployments—including the crucible of the last 15 years of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan—the
men and women comprising our AVF have distinguished themselves as well-disciplined,
resilient, and lethal.
Comprised of Active Duty, Reserve, and National Guard personnel numbering
approximately 2.1 million, the AVF has historically been manned, trained, and resourced to meet
national security requirements. However, the AVF was never intended to stand alone in time of
national emergency.
In December 1979, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, and in his January 1980 State
of the Union address, then-President Jimmy Carter announced his intention to resume draft
registration. By Presidential Proclamation of July 2, 1980, Carter reestablished the requirement
for all males aged 18 to 25 to register for military selective service. 6 Unlike in previous
registration regulations, however, men were not required to undergo immediate classification and
evaluation for fitness to serve in the military. 7
The DoD currently has no operational plans that envision mobilization at a level that
would require conscription. 8 Even in the face of sustained conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan,
DoD has maintained its ability to recruit and retain a professional volunteer force without
resorting to a draft. Some assert that the “revolution in military affairs” wrought by high2

Kristy Kamarck, The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress (Washington, DC: U.S.
Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service, April 11, 2016) [hereinafter Kamarck, Issues for Congress],
summary.
3
Per Public Law 92-129, An Act to amend the Military Selective Service Act of 1967; to increase military pay; to
authorize military active duty strengths for fiscal year 1972; and for other purposes, September 28, 1971.
4
Presidential Proclamation 4360 (89 Stat. 1255).
5
Kamarck, Issues for Congress, p. 11.
6
For purposes of this report, the terms “selective service” and “military selective service” are used to refer to the
program and process associated with registration of American men for induction into the Armed Forces in time of
national emergency, as described in the MSSA. The title Selective Service System (SSS) refers to the independent
federal agency charged to administer and oversee the selective service program and process.
7
Kamarck, Issues for Congress, p. 12.
8
Joint Staff, J-5, November 17, 2016.

2

 technology weapons and the advent of the cyber battlefield could obviate the need to mobilize
manpower at the rates seen in the 20th century. 9
Nonetheless, the potential for global conflict on the scale of another world war still exists.
Every Administration since 1980 has made the conscious decision to maintain national
registration for selective service as the tool through which Congress and the President would
provide additional manpower to the Armed Forces—an “insurance policy”—should future
threats spark requirements for forces in excess of those available to the AVF.
The Selective Service System
The Selective Service System (SSS) is an independent federal agency within the
executive branch, headquartered in Arlington, Virginia. Since 1973, the MSSA has designated
the SSS as an “active standby” organization, with the mission to:
•

maintain a complete registration and classification structure capable of immediate
operation in the event of a national emergency (including a structure for the
registration and classification of persons qualified for practice or employment in a
health care occupation essential to the maintenance of the Armed Forces); and

•

maintain personnel adequate to reconstitute immediately the full operations of the
System, including military reservists who are trained to operate such System, and
who can be ordered to active duty for such purposes in the event of a national
emergency. 10

The report addresses each of these missions, in turn.
The SSS maintains a registration structure and database ready for immediate use in in
the event of a national emergency. In accord with then-President Carter’s proclamation,
selective service registration resumed in 1980. The MSSA requires registration by most male
citizens and residents of the United States who are at least 18 years of age, and not yet 26. A
man must register within 30 days of his 18th birthday and update his registration within 10 days
of a change in address. Individuals are not permitted to register beyond their 26th birthday.
Under current law, women may serve voluntarily in the U.S. Armed Forces but are not required
to register with the SSS.
The SSS processes more than 2.3 million new registrations annually and regularly
updates registrants’ addresses using self-reported information and automatic data feeds from
other federal and state agencies. Most registration is accomplished on-line through the SSS
website 11 and automatically via electronic data sharing arrangements with other federal and state
9
David Barno and Nora Bensahel, Mirages of War: Six Illusions from our Recent Conflicts, War on the Rocks,
April 11, 2017 [hereinafter, Barno and Bensahel, Mirages of War].
10
MSSA, section 10(h).
11
Selective Service System website, https://www.sss.gov. The website also serves as a public and intragovernmental interface that connects external and internal audiences and serves as a portal for access to information
about SSS plans, policies, and initiatives.

3

 agencies 12 that administer benefits for which selective service registration is a prerequisite. 13
Registration also may be accomplished using the Interactive Voice Response system at the SSS
National Call Center 14, and by paper forms available from the U.S. Postal Service. 15 The SSS
engages with U.S. Embassies and consulates around the world in an effort to ensure that U.S.
nationals living abroad are aware of registration requirement; approximately 40,000 registrations
annually are from foreign addresses. Because the peacetime authority of the SSS does not
extend to the classification or examination of registrants, all of those registered would generally
be considered to be “available for service” in the case of a draft, at which time they could be
reclassified or determined unfit. 16
In calendar year 2015, the overall registration compliance rate for men ages 18 through
25 was 91 percent. 17 Compliance is monitored and enforced through a variety of mechanisms,
including crosschecks with the Social Security Administration, the Internal Revenue Service,
state motor vehicle departments, and other federal and state agencies that administer benefits for
which selective service registration is a prerequisite. Men who fail to register may be subject to
criminal penalties, loss of eligibility for federal or state jobs and education benefits, and denial of
a security clearance. Documented or undocumented immigrants who fail to register may not be
able to obtain United States citizenship.

12
The SSS reports that in FY 2016, approximately 22 percent of its electronic registrant data was collected by the
Department of Education as part of the student aid application process. The application for federal student aid
includes a “register me” checkbox that facilitates the automatic selective service registration of males. In
cooperation with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, immigrant men ages 18 through 25 who are accepted
for permanent U.S. residence are registered automatically; men of registration age who apply for an immigrant visa
through the Department of State are also automatically registered. 40 states, 3 territories, and the District of
Columbia have enacted legislation that provides for automatic registration of males of age at the time they apply for
a driver's permit, license, or other form of state identification. In FY 2016, more than 1 million young men
registered electronically through their state Department of Motor Vehicles. See SSS Report to the Congress of the
United States for FY 2016, p. 8. See generally Kamarck, Issues for Congress, pp. 15-17.
13
For example, in November 1985, the Thurmond Amendment to the Defense Authorization Act established Title 5,
U.S. Code, Section 3328, which requires a male to register with the selective service as a prerequisite for
appointment to most federal jobs. The Solomon Amendment added Section 12(f) to the Military Selective Service
Act in September 1982. Male students who have a requirement to register for the draft must do so as a precondition
to receipt of Title 4 federal student financial aid, which includes such need-based programs as Guaranteed Student
Loans and Pell Grants. And, on November 6, 1986, President Reagan signed into law the Immigration Reform and
Control Act, requiring males between the ages of 18 and 26 who applying for legalization under the act to register
for selective service had they not already done so.
14
The telephonic Integrated Voice Response system accounts for an average of 21,000 annual registrations.
15
In FY 2016, only 3 percent of all registrations—78,000—were from paper forms “direct mailed” to potential
registrants or distributed through the U.S Postal Service and returned via its “mail back” program. The SSS ensures
that the U.S. Postal Service is regularly stocked with a supply of registration and change of address forms for use in
its nearly 32,000 post offices. This program facilitates registration by young men who do not have access to the
internet, and have neither a driver’s license nor a social security number. Young men who enlist or access into the
military are automatically registered. See SSS Report to the Congress of the United States for FY 2016, p. 6.
16
Although putatively labeled as “available for service”, in actuality many registrants could be eligible for
postponement, deferment, or exemption from service. Further, many may not meet the military’s physical, mental,
or moral suitability standards. The classification and examination processes responsible for such determinations
would be initiated only were a draft to be directed.
17
SSS Report to the Congress of the United States for FY 2016, p. 5. It appears that calendar year 2015 is the last
year for which complete data is available.

4

 The backbone of the registration process is the database of registrants maintained at the
SSS Data Management Center (DMC), located north of Chicago, Illinois. 18 The registration
database, on which the conduct of any future draft would rely, includes approximately 17 million
records of men in the primary draft pool (18-25 years old), 22.5 million registrants in the
extended pool (26-35 years old), and 45.5 million men 36-80 years old. With holdings totaling
about 85 million records—the DMC maintains one of the largest databases of personallyidentifiable information in the federal government. 19
In peacetime, the database is used primarily to verify the registration of males who apply
for federal or state employment or benefits, eligibility for which is conditioned on draft
registration. To a great degree, data sharing is automated and automatic. Through its
Registration, Compliance, and Verification tool, the SSS both provides data to, and receives data
from, other government agencies, including the Department of Labor, the Department of
Education, the Department of State, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, the
DoD, and the Alaska Permanent Fund. Information received from these agencies is matched
against existing database records; if no record exists, one is created and the SSS uses the
information to reach out to individuals and remind them of their obligation to register. 20 Each
year, the SSS provides the names, addresses, and Social Security Numbers of men aged 18
through 25 to the U.S. Census Bureau for its inter-census estimate program. Also annually, the
SSS provides the Department of Justice with a list of individuals who are required to register, but
have failed to do so. 21
The SSS regularly trains and exercises personnel and systems to ensure readiness to
execute a draft. The field structure of the SSS is grounded in 2,069 local boards staffed with
11,000 volunteer board members—located in almost every county of the United States and its
territories. Each local board must be prepared to administer the registrant classification process
in the community it serves and take action on any claims or appeals that arise. Board members
must be trained in applicable regulations and procedures so that, if a draft is reinstated, they will
be able to fulfill their obligations fairly and equitably, ensuring that registrants’ rights to due
process are protected. Board members receive annual training in which they review and
adjudicate sample cases similar to real-life situations. The SSS board structure also includes 96
District Appeal Boards and one National Appeal Board. In the event of a mass mobilization, the
SSS would draw on more than 500 Reserve Force Officers, 1,500 military retirees recalled to
duty, 700 State Resource Volunteers, and 6,500 newly-hired federal employees to support the
execution of a draft. 22 Preparedness efforts span the entirety of the SSS, encompassing all
18

Kamarck, Issues for Congress, p. 22.
SSS Report to the Congress of the United States for FY 2016, p. 18.
20
Id.
21
Ibid at p. 18. Annually, the SSS forwards to DoJ a list of roughly 630,000 names and addresses of men aged 1930, who have either evaded registration or refused to register. In practice, there have been no criminal prosecutions
for failure to register since January 1986.
22
See generally, Selective Service System website, https://www.sss.gov. The SSS now manages all of its personnel
through the agency’s three region headquarters located in North Chicago, Illinois, Marietta, Georgia, and Denver,
Colorado. These regions are responsible for maintaining readiness at the grassroots level. They also manage the
activities of the agency’s 56 State Directors, conduct training for Reserve Forces Officers and civilian board
members, and ensure the local boards and District Appeal Boards are staffed. The regions also directly support the
SSS’s goal of increasing registration compliance through local registration awareness programs.
19

5

 functions necessary to maintain the mass mobilization infrastructure in a state of preparedness,
transition it to full operational status, and manage it to accomplish the mobilization mission.
Actions Attending the Execution of a Draft
Although these processes could be modified for implementation in a future draft, past
experience and current planning by the SSS indicate that the following actions, in the following
sequence, likely would attend the execution of a draft. 23
Congress and the President authorize mass mobilization. Should a crisis occur that
requires more troops than the AVF can supply, a draft may be initiated only after the Congress
passes and the President signs enabling legislation. The President cannot initiate a draft on his
own. Congress would first have to pass authorizing legislation, and the President would have to
sign the bill into law.
All components of the SSS are activated. In the event of a return to conscription, the
SSS would expand significantly and technology links between all SSS locations and components
would be activated. The structure of the SSS is illustrated in Figure 1.
•

56 presidentially-appointed State Directors would establish State Headquarters at
designated National Guard armories to provide operational management for induction
processing and operation of the Alternative Service Program within the state.

•

436 Area Offices would begin opening in select recruiting station offices across the
United States, with the support of more than 500 Reserve Force Officers representing
all branches of the Armed Forces, 1,500 noncommissioned officers recalled from
retirement, and 700 State Resource Volunteers. Area Offices are authorized to
classify registrants into an administrative class (e.g., exemption to perform service in
the National Guard, exemption as a “sole surviving son”) 24, issue decisions on
postponements 25, and will serve as an intake point for claims or appeals filed by
registrants who have been ordered to report for examination or induction.

•

2,069 local boards would be activated throughout the Nation, staffed by more than
11,000 volunteers. The local board will serve as the initial classifying authority for
judgmental classifications (e.g., exemption as a conscientious objector, deferment for
familial hardship, exemption as a minister) and will adjudicate claims or appeals of
administrative classification and postponement decisions rendered by Areas
Offices. 26

23

See generally Selective Service System website, https://www.sss.gov.
32 Code of Federal Regulations, part 1633.1(f).
25
For example, a college student may have his induction postponed until he finishes the current semester or, if a
senior, until the end of the academic year; a high school student may have his induction postponed until he graduates
or reaches age 20. 32 Code of Federal Regulations, part 1624.6.
26
32 Code of Federal Regulations, part 1633.1(d) and (e).
24

6

 Figure 1: Structure of the Selective Service System

Admin
Management

National Appeal
Board

Admin
Management

District Appeal
Board (96)

National
Headquarters

Data
Management
Center

Region
Headquarters (3)

Activated Upon
Mobilization

State
Headquarters
(56)

Alternative
Service Offices

Area Offices
(436)

(48)

Appeals
Process

Local Boards
(2,069)

•

27

The MSSA and federal regulations mandate the creation and establishment of at least
one District Appeal Board in each of the 96 Federal judicial districts in the United
States. 27 A District Appeal Board, consisting of three or more members, has the
jurisdiction to review, and to affirm or change, any local board decision appealed to it.

MSSA, Section 10(b)(3).

7

 If a District Appeal Board denial is not unanimous, the case is reviewed and
determined by a five-member National Appeal Board in Washington, D.C. 28
A lottery is conducted. An early step in the resumption of the induction process would
be the conduct of a random drawing of dates of birth, to determine the sequence in which
registrants of prime draft age would be called for processing for induction. For a conventional
draft of “untrained” manpower, a man is in the first priority during the calendar year of his 20th
birthday. The first to be called, in the sequence of birthdays determined by the lottery, will be
men whose 20th birthday falls during that year, followed, if needed, by men aged 21, 22, 23, 24
and 25. 18-year-olds and those turning 19 probably would not be drafted. Each year, as a man
ages, he shifts into a lower-priority group.
Registrants are classified. Classification is the process of determining who is available
for military service and who is deferred or exempted. Registrants are not classified during
peacetime, but in a national emergency requiring mass mobilization directed by the President and
Congress, would be placed into categories based on their eligibility for military service. Initially,
each registrant is presumed to be classified as “1-A” (available for unrestricted military service),
unless and until they file a claim or appeal and are granted temporary deferment or permanent
exemption in one of 21 different administrative (e.g., postponements to allow completion of
education, deferral due membership in the National Guard, exemption as a “sole surviving son”)
or judgmental (e.g., exemption as a conscientious objector, deferment for familial hardship,
exemption as a minister) categories. Classifications are based on each registrant’s individual
circumstances and beliefs.
The following administrative classification categories are among those available under
extant policies and procedures 29:

28
29

•

Members of Reserve Components (including members of the National Guard and
senior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps cadets or midshipmen who have contracted
to accept a Reserve commission) may perform service in the National Guard or
Reserves.

•

A surviving son or brother in a family in which the parent or sibling died as a result
of U.S. military service, or is in a captured or missing in action status, is exempt from
service.

•

Officials deferred by law, including state governors, members of federal and state
legislative bodies, and U.S. Court Judges, are exempt from service for as long as they
continue to hold office.

•

Immigrants and dual nationals may, in some cases, be exempt from U.S. military
service, depending upon their place of residence and country of citizenship.

32 Code of Federal Regulations, part 1633.
32 Code of Federal Regulations, parts 1602.2 and 1630.

8

 The following judgmental classification categories are among those available under
extant policies and procedures 30:
•

•

Conscientious objectors perform service to the Nation in a manner consistent with
their moral, ethical, or religious opposition to participation in war in any form. 31
Depending upon the nature of his beliefs, a conscientious objector serves in either a
noncombatant capacity in the armed forces or a civilian job contributing to the
national interest. The SSS administers an Alternative Service Program for
conscientious objectors who are required to perform civilian service in lieu of serving
in the military. Working with and through the Alternative Service Employment
Network, the SSS identifies and approves employers ready to offer job placement to a
classified conscientious objector in one of six approved occupations: health care
services, educational services, environmental programs, social services, community
services, or agricultural work. The employer supervises a conscientious objector’s
work and manages his 24-month period of alternative service.
Hardship deferments are available for men whose induction would result in hardship to
family members who depend upon them for support. Such deferments are limited to
365 days.

•

Ministers of Religion are exempt from service.

Registrants are evaluated for physical, mental, and moral suitability for military
service. Registrants with low lottery numbers are ordered to report to a U.S. Military Entrance
Processing Station (MEPS) for a physical, mental, and moral evaluation to determine whether
they are fit for military service. Those who pass the military evaluation will receive induction
orders. An inductee will have 10 days to report to the local MEPS for induction.
Claims and appeals are adjudicated. If a registrant believes that for some reason he
cannot or should not report for examination or induction as directed, he may request a
postponement or reclassification by filing a claim and sending it to the Area Office supporting
his local board of jurisdiction. The Area Office’s receipt of such a claim delays the registrant’s
induction until his claim has been fully processed and adjudicated. Local board members will
begin reviewing and deciding the outcome of the individual’s claims. Board members may
personally interview the registrant and persons who know him to gain a better understanding of
his situation. A man may appeal a local board’s decision to a District Appeal Board, and
subsequently to the National Appeal Board.
Draftees are inducted into the military. According to current SSS plans, the first
inductees must be delivered to the military within 193 days from a mass mobilization order.
Given this background, we now consider the specific matters posed by Congress in
section 552 of the NDAA for FY 2017.
30

32 Code of Federal Regulations, parts 1602.13 and 1630.
32 Code of Federal Regulations, part 1636. During the Vietnam conflict, an estimated 3 percent of inductees
submitted judgmental claims for conscientious objector status.
31

9

 Benefits Derived from the Military Selective Service System
Direct Benefits
The military selective service system guarantees the certain and timely fulfillment of
military manpower requirements in a national emergency. Should mass mobilization be directed
by the President and Congress, the selective service process is prepared to support DoD
manpower requirements through the conduct of a fair and equitable draft. The SSS and the
registration database provide the structure to support a mass mobilization that will rapidly
increase the size of Service forces. This is not a theoretical capability. In the last three major
engagements before the draft was abolished, the military selective service system provided DoD
with nearly 13.5 million men to fight and win our Nation’s wars: from 1940 to 1946 in World
War II (10,021,279 inductions); from 1950 to 1953 in Korea (1,681,820 inductions); and from
1954 to 1973 in Vietnam (1,766,910 inductions).
The United States must always retain the ability to respond to the “catastrophe yet
unanticipated.” 32 Maintaining the systems, infrastructure, and processes required to conduct a
draft provides a strategic “shock absorber” 33 that will enable the country to mobilize parts or all
of society in the face of a crisis of existential proportions—or in the words of then-President
Reagan, “a relatively low-cost ‘insurance policy’ against our underestimation of the maximum
level of threat we expect our Armed Forces to face.”
Since the SSS resumed registration in 1980, each Administration has preserved the
agency and its programs, with the realization that it is the only proven, time-tested mechanism by
which to expand the AVF in the event of a national emergency. At present, 91 percent of U.S.
men 18 to 25 years old have registered with the SSS—nearly 17 million names and addresses are
on file for men in the primary age group for draft. The extended database for men aged 26 to 35
years contains the names and addresses of nearly 22.5 million registrants. The registration
database itself mitigates risk to the Nation; its very existence would reduce the time required for
full defense mobilization. More importantly, the vast pool of human capability represented in
and by the database stands ready to be called to bridge a potential capacity gap between the AVF
and the force requirements of a conflict of global proportions or mammoth national emergency.
Even though such scenarios remain unlikely, the consequences of being unable to wage such a
war or respond to such a crisis would prove disastrous. 34 A proven national program of selective
service facilitates military manpower planning for an unknown future, particularly when
contemplating the most likely and/or most dangerous national security scenarios.
No one can predict the future of war. As then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates once
quipped, since the Vietnam conflict, the United States has a perfect record of predicting the next
war: “we have never once gotten it right.” The prospect of a future draft—and the readiness of

32

Attributed to then-Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, 2013.
David Barno and Nora Bensahel, Why We Still Need the Draft, War on the Rocks, February 23, 2016 [hereinafter
Barno and Bensahel, Why We Still Need the Draft].
34
Id.
33

10

 the underlying systems, infrastructure, and processes to effect it—serve as a quiet but important
hedge against an unknowable future rife with ever-changing threats to the Nation. 35
The selective service registration database provides valuable military recruiting leads.
The continued existence of the requirement that young males register for military selective
service allows DoD and the Services to concentrate their recruiting resources on manning the
current AVF, with the confidence that the SSS can provide a vast influx of manpower if needed
in a national emergency. Further, registration, once used only for conscription, now functions as
a rich source of information for military recruiting. The selective service process engages more
than 2 million enlistment-eligible males annually through routine registration and compliance
actions. On a monthly basis, the SSS provides the DoD Joint Advertising and Market Research
Studies Office (JAMRS) the names, addresses, and dates of birth of all new registrants—more
than 2.3 million in FY 2016 alone—to be used by DoD for recruiting purposes. In turn, working
through the Military Service Recruiting Commands, JAMRS forwards hundreds of thousands of
timely leads to military recruiters from young men potentially eligible for military service. In
addition, every man who registers with the SSS receives a registration acknowledgement letter
and registration card in the mail. Per agreement with DoD, the SSS inserts in this mailing a
“joint lead” generation card developed by JAMRS on behalf of all the Services. Annually, the
“joint lead” generation card generates approximately 75,000-85,000 recruiting leads from
men interested in the possibility of volunteering for service.
Although some have rightly suggested that JAMRS could obtain the names,
addresses, and dates of birth of enlistment-eligible males through the purchase of data from
commercial vendors—JAMRS purchases such databases as a means of securing information
about enlistment-eligible females—recruiting experts believe that the “joint lead” generation
card remains their most valuable source of new, “high propensity” leads. When a young
man receives his registration acknowledgement in the mail and extracts the “joint lead”
generation card, he inevitably must consider, if only for the briefest of moments, the
possibility of military service. For some, the card and the thought are quickly set aside; for
others, the moment induces an openness to, and curiosity about, the prospect of service—a
consideration of one’s options as an adult and duty as a citizen. As a recruiting tool, the
anonymous ease associated with culling the names of potential leads from a commercial
database pales in comparison to the import and effect of that tangible “moment” at which a
young man reviews the card and first thinks to himself, “maybe I could do that”. 36
The links to benefit programs that enlistment-eligible youths hold dear—such as student
loan eligibility, federal employment opportunities, and the naturalization process—associate
selective service registration with positive outcomes that may help influence their propensity to
serve. In addition, the registration system provides opportunities for key influencers to engage

35

Id.
In the context of recruiting, it is critical to build in potential recruits a belief in their “self-efficacy” related to
military service. “Self-efficacy” is defined generally as one’s belief in one’s ability to succeed in specific situations
or accomplish a particular task. One’s sense of self-efficacy is believed to play a major role in how one approaches
goals, tasks, and challenges. In general, a potential recruit who reviews the “joint lead” generation card, or other
recruiting media and believes “maybe I can do that” is more likely to pursue additional information about military
service.
36

11

 with the targeted population. For example, 18,218 of the Nation’s 20,989 37 targeted high
schools—an 87 percent participation rate—participate in the selective service High School
Registrar Program, affording an opportunity for civic-minded school officials to both encourage
registration compliance and discuss with eligible students the positive aspects of military
service. 38
Indirect Benefits
Registration reminds America’s youth of the importance of Military, National, and Public
Service. The military selective service registration process empowers America’s young men.
The voluntary act of registration by a young man on or around his 18th birthday has been, and
will continue to be, an opportunity for young American men and male immigrants to consider
deliberately a future of military service, and to act accordingly. By registering with the SSS,
every young man is reminded of the possibility that in a time of emergency, he may be called to
arms in the defense of his nation. As then-Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel stated in May
2013, registration “remind[s] our youth that public service is a valuable part of American
citizenship.” Even more, registration is a reminder to all it touches—a registrant’s family,
teachers, clergy, and other influencers—that military, national, and public service are inherent
obligations of citizenship in a free society.
Military selective service is a critical link between the AVF and society at large.
Selective service is a lone, slender thread 39 that connects all U.S. citizens to their military. By
reinforcing the fundamental responsibility of all citizens to defend the country in times of crisis,
the possibility of a draft links the entirety of the American people to our Nation’s wars, and the
risks of military service in those wars. 40
Fewer than 1 percent of Americans today serve in uniform. As the conscripts of World
War II, Korea, Vietnam, and the Cold War fade away, the veteran population is declining in both
actual size and the percentage of society it inhabits. 41 Congress and the media make much of the
fact that today, fewer Americans have a personal connection to the military than at any time in
the past several decades—the gap between the American people and their military is growing
ever larger. The MSSA restates the sense of Congress that “in a free society, the obligations and
privileges of serving in the armed forces . . . should be shared generally” 42. But the general
public’s “[reliance] on others—self-selected volunteers—to fight for the Nation has slowly
become an accepted norm.” 43
37

High School Facts at a Glance: Number of Institutions. Across the United States there are 26,407 public
secondary schools and 10,693 private secondary schools. (Digest of Education Statistics, 2001, Table 89, June 18,
2014). However, the SSS High School Registrar’s program targets only those schools with male students; therefore,
the number of high schools cited is less than the total combined number of public, private, charter, parochial, and
vocational secondary schools.
38
SSS Report to the Congress of the United States for FY 2016, p. 2.
39
Barno and Bensahel, Why We Still Need the Draft.
40
Id.
41
Phillip Carter, 99 Problems But a Draft Ain’t One, War on the Rocks, December 3, 2013 [hereinafter, Carter, 99
Problems.]
42
MSSA, Section 1(c).
43
Barno and Bensahel, Why We Still Need the Draft.

12

 As fewer and fewer members of our society have direct military experience, it becomes
increasingly important to maintain the link between the AVF and our society at large. The men
and women of today’s Armed Forces must know that the general population of our country
stands behind them, committed to sharing the risks and burdens of military service, should the
preservation of our national security so require.
Absent the possibility of a draft, however remote, the American people will grow ever
more distant from the military, from the need to think about America’s changing role in a
dangerous world, from the debates by their elected leaders on the use of force, and most
importantly, from the always deadly decision to go to war. 44 In contrast, conscription would
instantly link every family with a draftee in the force—or with a son, husband, father, or brother
at risk of being drafted—to the military. 45 Maintaining the ability to mobilize the larger nation
to fight when necessary, and the will of all to share personally in the hardships of war, is an
essential link between the AVF, our society at large, and the preservation of our democracy.
Military selective service is a symbol of national will and a deterrent to potential enemies
of the United States. Maintaining military selective service sends a strong signal to potential
adversaries that the United States is willing to draw on the full depth and breadth of its national
resources, if and when necessary to wage war. The mere existence of the SSS and the
registration requirement serve as a symbol to the world of our Nation’s resolve and preparedness.
Those in favor of then-President Carter’s 1980 decision to reestablish draft registration argued
that it sent an unequivocal message to the Soviet Union that the United States was prepared to
act to defend its interests. 46 In 1994, then-President Bill Clinton stated, “. . . terminating . . .
draft registration now could send the wrong signal to our potential enemies who are watching for
signs of U.S. resolve.” And in 2012, then-President Barack Obama described the registration
system as having “both military and symbolic significance.”
Beyond symbolism, selective service signals—to allies and potential adversaries alike—
the depth of U.S. commitment to the defense of our nation and its interests. Of reassurance to
our allies, this signal has a deterrent effect on our nation’s enemies. “Deterrence is not only a
function of current power; it also includes the nation’s potential power when galvanized.” 47
Active registration and compliance processes provide a rock-solid foundation for a national
strategic reserve, setting the conditions for timely and certain access to the full weight of
manpower that may be required to defend ourselves and our treaty partners. Even considering
only the 17 million men aged 18 through 25 whose names and addresses are recorded in the
registration database, our enemies cannot help but be struck by the sheer mass of human force
the United States could leverage. Through registration and the mobilization capability it
promises, America demonstrates the public will and the practical ability to fight and win our
Nation’s wars.
Any decision with respect to the program of selective service—whether to sustain,
modify, reaffirm, expand, or terminate registration—will send a signal to the world and have an
44

Id.
Carter, 99 Problems.
46
Kamarck, Issues for Congress, p. 12.
47
Barno and Bensahel, Why We Still Need the Draft.
45

13

 impact on deterrence, one way or the other. Maintaining the mechanism to implement
conscription in times of crisis, ensures that the United States stands ready to send an indisputable
signal of national resolve by choosing to initiate a draft, even one of modest size. 48 In contrast,
eliminating military selective service could be interpreted by adversaries of the United States as a
potential weakness, thus emboldening existing or potential enemies.
The Extent to which Expanding Registration to Include Women would Impact the Benefits
of the Military Selective Service System
As previously noted, under current law, women may serve voluntarily in the U.S. Armed
Forces but are not, and never have been, required to register for selective service. In fact, the
language of the MSSA and its implementing regulations prohibit the SSS from registering
women. 49 Before considering the effects of requiring women to register, it is appropriate to
consider why women are currently exempt from this requirement.
Then-President Carter’s 1980 proposal to reinstate draft registration was originally
accompanied by proposed legislative language that would have modified the MSSA to authorize
the registration of women. 50 In justifying his proposal, the then-President Carter explained:
“My decision to register women is a recognition of the reality that both women
and men are working members of our society. It confirms what is already
obvious throughout our society—that women are now providing all types of skills
in every profession. The military should be no exception. [. . .] There is no
distinction possible, on the basis of ability or performance, that would allow me to
exclude women from an obligation to register.” 51
Congress rejected the then-President Carter’s proposal, with an explanation in Title VII
of Senate Report 26-826:
“[T]he starting point for any discussion of the appropriateness of registering
women for the draft is the question of the proper role of women in combat. The
principle that women should not intentionally and routinely engage in combat is
fundamental, and enjoys wide support among our people. It is universally
supported by military leaders who have testified before the committee, and forms
the linchpin for any analysis of this problem. [. . .] Current law and policy exclude
women from being assigned to combat in our military forces, and the committee
reaffirms this policy. The policy precluding the use of women in combat is, in the
committee’s view, the most important reason for not including women in a
registration system.”
48

Id.
MSSA, Section 3(a). As presently written, the law refers specifically to “male persons”, in stating who must
register and who is susceptible to draft. Implementing regulations at 32 Code of Federal Regulations, part 1615.5
provide that Federal regulations state, “[n]o person who is not required by selective service law or the Proclamation
of the President to register shall be registered.” For women to be required to register with Selective Service,
Congress would have to amend the law.
50
Kamarck, Issues for Congress, p. 13.
51
Statement of the President, Office of the White House Press Secretary, February 8, 1980.
49

14

 In the 1981 case of Rostker v. Goldberg 52, the Supreme Court ruled on a challenge to the
exemption of women from selective service registration, upholding the constitutionality of the
Nation’s practice of registering only men. Writing for a majority of the Court, Justice William
Rehnquist reasoned: “The existence of the combat restriction clearly indicates the basis for
Congress’ decision to exempt women from registration. The purpose of registration was to
prepare for a draft of combat troops. Since women are excluded from combat, Congress
concluded that they would not be needed in the event of a draft, and therefore decided not to
register them.”
Beginning in 2012, the DoD gradually began to eliminate prohibitions on the assignment
of women to direct ground combat. Following a unanimous recommendation by the Joint Chiefs
of Staff, then-Secretary of Defense Leon E. Panetta announced, on January 24, 2013, the end of
the direct ground combat exclusion rule for female service members. The Military Services
began planning to eliminate all unnecessary gender-based barriers to service and in the ensuing
two years, opened more than 300,000 new military occupations and duty positions to women.
Finally, on December 3, 2015, then-Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter promulgated a crowning
policy that opened all military occupational specialties to women and removed all final
restrictions on the service of women in combat. Qualified women were eligible to participate in
all career fields, in all duty positions, at all echelons of the Armed Forces.
In advance of this all-encompassing change, the Department was required, by statute, to
provide a report to Congress, analyzing the policy’s legal implications for the MSSA. In
December 2015, DoD advised Congress that the impending change “further alters the factual
backdrop” underpinning Rostker, but took no further stance on the legal issues raised by thenSecretary Carter’s decision to open all military positions to women.
The year that followed saw the appointment of the first female Combatant Commander.
Women graduated from the Army’s elite Ranger school, served on Navy submarines, and
completed Marine Corps Artillery officer's training. The shift also enabled the Department to
expand its recruiting reach to the entirety of the American population and to enlist qualified
personnel, both male and female, for service in combat occupations. And, in the context of a
mass mobilization, this change would permit the Department to place any qualified person—
male or female—in any position, in any Service, to meet the manpower demands of any mission.
Since the ban on women in combat was lifted, the merits of including women in the
requirement to register for the draft have been hotly debated in the media and in the halls of
Congress. In December 2016, then-Secretary of Defense Carter stated publicly:
“While I strongly support our all-volunteer approach and do not advocate
returning to a draft, I do think it makes sense for women to register for selective
service at this time. With all combat positions now open to women, we need to
have access to 100-percent of America’s population for our all-volunteer force to
be able to recruit the most qualified individuals and remain the finest fighting
force the world has ever known.”

52

Rostker v. Goldberg, 453 U.S. 57 (1981).

15

 Other senior military leaders from across the Services made similar personal
statements in favor of registering women for the draft. 53
A December 2016 survey asked respondents for their views on requiring women to
register for a possible military draft. About one-half (49 percent) of respondents would support
requiring women to register for the military draft; only 14 percent would oppose the mandatory
registration of women. 54 These “support” or “oppose” survey choices do not reflect the breadth
of public opinion on the issue, however.
At least two challenges to the current law excluding women from registration have been
raised: one lawsuit contending that the male-only draft is unconstitutional, the other claiming
that the exclusion of women from the draft is unlawful discrimination. On a broader level, some
believe that women cannot be equal in society as long as they are barred from full participation
in all levels of the national security system and thus should be allowed to register for the draft. 55
Others argue that equal access to combat jobs should oblige women to take equal responsibility
for registering for military selective service and potentially being assigned to combat roles in the
event of a draft. 56 But as things stand currently, the legal effect of removing all restrictions on
the assignment and utilization of women in the Armed Forces on the constitutionality of a maleonly draft registration requirement, has yet to be determined.
Some argue that the preservation of the national security does not require the service of
our country’s women. Recruiting studies estimate that only 29 percent of today’s youth qualify
for entry into the military, for a variety of educational, medical, criminal justice and other
reasons. 57 In rough proportion, were the United States to draft only 5 million of the 17 million
men of primary draft age, the resultant force would far exceed the foreseeable manpower
requirements of all but the most global of conflicts. 58
Others suggest that women should be obliged to enroll in the selective service system, but
should not be forced into combat roles on the occasion of a draft. But any such exemption for
women would raise fairness concerns for men, who would not have the same opportunities to opt
out of combat assignments. And, making the choice not to serve in combat available to both
male and female draftees would undercut the very purpose of the endeavor. 59
Those who are opposed to a requirement for women to register suggest that it is not fair
and equitable for women to be placed in the same roles as men because women do not have the
same physical capabilities as the average man and thus would have a lower probability of
survival if forced to serve in direct ground combat roles. To this, they add that it would be
53

Both General Mark Milley, Army Chief of Staff, and General Robert Neller, Commandant of the Marine Corps,
have publicly stated that all eligible and qualified men and women should be required to register for the draft.
Lamothe, Dan, “Army and Marine Corps Chiefs: It’s time for women to register for the draft”, The Washington
Post, February 2, 2016.
54
Joint Advertising Market Research and Studies, Current Events Tracker, December 2016.
55
Kamarck, Issues for Congress, p. 26.
56
Barno, David and Bensahel, Nora, “Now Women Should Register for the Draft, Time, December 7, 2015.
57
Joint Advertising Market Research and Studies, Quality of Military Accessions, 2014.
58
See generally Carter, 99 Problems.
59
Kamarck, Issues for Congress, p. 26.

16

 inefficient to draft thousands of women when only a small percentage would be physically
qualified to serve as part of a combat troop. Those in favor of female draft registration riposte
that future wars may have greater requirements for more technical skills in non-combat fields,
for which the percent of individuals qualified would not be as variable by gender. 60
Finally, from a theological or moral perspective, some say that it is wrong for women to
serve in combat roles; given that a draft would most likely be used to fill positions for combat
operations, women should be exempt from registering. This argument resonates strongly with a
segment of the U.S. population. Were women required to register for selective service, it could
significantly increase public opposition to the conduct of a draft and degrade public support for
engaging in a conflict that could require one. 61 This leads to perplexing questions as to the
potential draft classification of both men and women who hew to these perspectives, and whether
such beliefs could translate into a form of conscientious objection to service in a mixed gender
combat unit.
With this background in mind, we now address the potential effects of expanding
registration to include women on the direct and indirect benefits of military selective service.
Direct Benefits Potentially Associated with Expanding Registration to Women
The military selective service system guarantees the certain and timely fulfillment of
military manpower requirements in a national emergency. It would appear imprudent to exclude
approximately 50 percent of the population—the female half—from availability for the draft in
the case of a national emergency. Future wars may have requirements for skills in non-combat
fields in which the percentage of individuals qualified would not be as variable by gender. A
broader, deeper registrant pool would enhance the ability of the SSS to provide manpower to the
DoD in accordance with its force needs. This is particularly important because future wars may
have requirements for skills in non-combat fields in which the percentage of individuals
qualified would not be as variable by gender. 62 And, if a draft becomes necessary, the public
must see that it is fair and equitable. For that to happen, the maximum number of eligible
persons must be registered.
The registration database provides valuable military recruiting leads. 63 Requiring the
registration of women would substantially increase the number of leads provided to Service
recruiting organizations, effectively doubling the name and address data transferred monthly
from the SSS to the DoD. The DoD-developed “joint lead” generation card enclosed in SSS
mailings of acknowledgement letters to males who have registered, generates approximately
75,000-80,000 male leads annually. The Department anticipates that female registration could
generate an additional 35,000-40,000 annual female leads, providing a significant boost to
military recruiters, particularly given that female applicants tend to meet quality benchmarks at
higher rates than do males. 64 If the discernable positive recruiting effects on males associated
60

Ibid, p. 27.
Id.
62
Kamarck, Issues for Congress, p. 26.
63
The potential for sharing a “total citizen database” with other National Service Organizations, such as USA
Freedom Corps, Citizen Corps, AmeriCorps, and America’s Promise, has yet to be explored.
64
Joint Advertising Market Research and Studies, Joint Leads Study, 2009.
61

17

 with reviewing the “joint lead” generation card—the “maybe I can do that” moment in which the
possibility of military service is rendered tangible—translate as expected to a female registrant
population, the number of female leads, motivated by the sense of self-efficacy, could be even
higher. That all military positions are now open to women also may influence an increase in
leads among women registrants curious about, or having a propensity for service in combat
occupations, and inspired by the equal opportunity now afforded both men and women who can
meet the military’s tough standards. 65 As an aside, DoD currently pays commercial vendors for
data to generate female leads; this practice could be discontinued, rendering a small cost savings
to the Department. 66
Indirect Benefits Potentially Associated with Expanding Registration to Women
Registration reminds America’s youth of the importance of Military, National, and Public
Service. The draft’s utility as an “application of practical democracy” likely would be enhanced
by the registration of females. As recently as December 1, 2016, the Obama administration
announced support for the selective service registration of women, stating, “[t]he President
believes adding women to the draft would serve two purposes: showing a commitment to gender
equality throughout the armed services, and fostering a sense of public service that comes from
requiring draft registration as a ritual of adulthood”. 67 Universal registration would expand
emphasis on military, national, and public service by the totality of America’s youth, reminding
both men and women that service is a key tenet of citizenship. As with young men, the act of
registration, standing alone, would afford young American women a first, and perhaps best
opportunity to act deliberately in considering and exploring the option of a military career.
Military selective service is a critical link between the AVF and society at large.
Registering all young people between the ages of 18 and 25 for selective service, without regard
to gender, would further conjoin the interests of the American people and their military.
Universal registration would serve as a palpable reminder of the fundamental obligation,
common to all citizens—men and women, sons and daughters, husbands and wives, brothers and
sisters—to defend the country when called, and to share in the hardships of war. One would be
hard pressed to find an individual, a family, or a community without connection to a young man
or woman registered for the draft. These connections—the possibility that someone known or
loved could be pressed into military service should the preservation of our national security so
require, will link inextricably the American people with those who serve, now and into the
future.
Military selective service is a symbol of national will and a deterrent to potential enemies
of the United States. Registering females for the first time in the Nation’s history would not be
expected to detract from the symbolic or deterrent effects of draft registration. Rather, it would
seem to signal to allies and potential enemies alike, an enhanced resolve to defend our nation and
its partners, through the commitment and capability of the entirety of our citizenry. It is not
outside the realm of possibility, however, that nations that do not employ women in their Armed
65
DoD Equities with Proposed Changes to the Selective Service System (SSS) In Support of the Deputies Small
Group Meeting on Female Selective Service, July 1, 2016, p. 2.
66
Discussion Paper, Deputies Small Group Meeting on Female Selective Service, June 29, 2016, TAB B, p. 3.
67
Korte, Gregory and Vanden Brook, Tom, “White House: Obama supports registering women for military draft,”
USA Today, December 1, 2016.

18

 Forces or in combat roles, could perceive the extension of the draft to women as weakening the
power and lethality of the U.S. military.
An Additional Benefit Potentially Associated with Expanding Registration to Women
The registration of women would provide an additional benefit not presently derived
from the military selective service system, as follows:
The registration of women would promote fairness and equity. That no segment of the
population from ages 18 to 25 would be exempt from draft registration would ensure an equity
not previously possible in the registration process and would comport the military selective
service system with our Nation’s touchstone values of fair and equitable treatment, and equality
of opportunity.
In a tactical manifestation of the inequity inherent in the current system, men are required
to register for selective service as a condition of eligibility for myriad consequential benefits and
services at both the federal and state levels. A man who forgets, delays, or fails to register is
denied government employment, job training, student loans and grants, a driver’s license, and a
security clearance, to name but a few. 68 Even if he has registered, government action on a man’s
application for benefits and services for which he is eligible often is held in abeyance while his
selective service registration is verified with the SSS. Women suffer none of these denials or
delays, solely because they are not required to register for the draft, solely because they are . . .
women. That technical arguments can be applied to justify such differences in treatment is
beside the point. Men are treated differently than their female counterparts, for reasons
seemingly grounded in gender; this inequity creates the perception of discrimination and unfair
dealing—a tarnish that attaches to the military selective service system writ large.
A requirement for universal registration would place women and men on equal footing.
Each would be required to register; each would be required to verify registration as a prerequisite
to receipt of government benefits and services; and each would be subject to the same
penalties—the denial of benefits and services—for non-compliance. Restoring the perception
and reality of fair and equal treatment for all in the administration of essential federal and state
programs is an additional benefit to be derived from extending to women the requirement to
register for the draft.
Additional Resource Requirements to Register Women
The immediate registration of all females in the 18-25 age range, the prospect of doubling
the number of annual registrations and the associated compliance and verification processes,
together with the potential requirement to mobilize from this larger pool, if directed, would seem
likely to require an increase in SSS resourcing, as well as the revision of selective service
policies and procedures to address this new population.
68

A man who forgets or neglects to register until after he turns 26, past the age at which registration is required,
must show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that his failure was not “knowing and willful”. The process for
adjudicating the matter can be lengthy—as long as 18 months in some cases. During this period, the man is not
eligible for certain federal and state benefits and services.

19

 Were Congress and the President to authorize the registration of women, the current
cohort of about 11 million women in the primary age range of 18-25 would need to be registered
in short order. Annually thereafter, the inclusion of females would almost double the number of
registrants, and the associated compliance and verification transactions.
The SSS has previously indicated that it has developed a five-year, phased
implementation plan that would absorb such a significant increase in mission. As we understand
it, the SSS could initiate a drive to register women of all age cohorts, beginning paper-based
registration within approximately 45 days of the enactment of directive legislation or a court
order, electronic registration of the primary draft age cohorts within 12 months, and full
registration, including compliance and verification cross-checks, within approximately 18
months.
We understand that the SSS has projected that it would require additional appropriations
along the order of approximately $9 million in the first year of the plan, and $37 million over the
first five years of execution. If assigned the mission and provided the additional resources
requested, the SSS believes that, with minor modifications, its existing infrastructure is adequate
to register and draft women, as directed. 69
To enable expanded registration, it is expected that the SSS would augment its staff with
full-time equivalent civilian employees and contractors focused on increasing the capacity and
throughput of its data intake, sharing, and management systems, and on reviewing and updating
existing data exchange agreements and Memoranda of Understanding with federal and state
agency stakeholders. 70
Extant policies and procedures governing a future draft would require review and
amendment to ensure consideration of women registrants in the execution of a fair and equitable
lottery, call and deliver process, and MEPS examination and induction. The Alternative Service
Program for conscientious objectors also would require amendment, and potentially expansion,
to address the female population. And, the SSS would likely need to train and exercise its
personnel and systems to ensure their readiness to execute a draft in accordance with the new
policies and procedures, if directed to do so.
Functions Currently Performed by the SSS that would be Assumed by DoD in the Absence
of a National Registration Capability
We begin our discussion in this section by recalling the Congressional declaration that
the “Selective Service System should remain administratively independent of any other agency,
including the Department of Defense.” 71 Maintaining the clear distinction between the DoD and
the administration of the Nation’s selective service registration system ensures the preeminence
69

Selective Service System website, https://www.sss.gov/Registration/Women-And-Draft.
Note too that federal and state laws conditioning the receipt of government benefits and services on draft
registration would require deliberate assessment and possible modification to render them applicable to females.
This would not be the responsibility of the SSS, but it would undoubtedly require the investment of significant time,
effort, and funds on the part of federal and state stakeholders.
71
MSSA, Section 1(f).
70

20

 of civilian control and has historically been viewed as important to the public’s perception of the
draft process as fair and equitable. 72 DoD believes that there is great wisdom and value in
sustaining this “separation of powers”.
We note first the intractable challenge that would arise were the requirement for
peacetime selective service registration repealed, precluding continued update of the current
registration database. Each year hence, another birth group of men would reach age 26 and be
dropped from the active database; at the same time, no new 18-year-olds would be registered.
Consequently, in only 8 years, the current registration database would contain not a single name
in the primary draft pool; in the face of a national emergency, our ability to identify the set of
draft-age men and execute a mass mobilization would be undone.
In responding to this question, however, DoD presumed that it would be required to
assume responsibility for the registration function as it currently exists, as detailed above in this
report. 73 This report does not purport to envision how DoD might otherwise execute the
registration function. While there would be no necessity for DoD to do things exactly as they
have been done in the past, the SSS experience provides the only capability currently on hand to
execute the registration requirement. In the absence of a comprehensive study beyond the scope
of this report, DoD takes no position on whether the current national registration system and
process could or should be modified. We look forward to participating in a broader national
dialogue on these issues, to be fostered by the work of the National Commission on Military,
National, and Public Service.
That said, were the current national registration responsibilities shifted to DoD, the
Department would be required to assume responsibility for both the collection and verification of
the personally-identifying information of draft-age men and the sustainment of the registration
database. The express and implied tasks comprising these functions are legion, including in
main:
•

Implementing multi-pronged public outreach and awareness efforts to educate and
inform young men and influencers about the importance of selective service
registration and promote compliance with the legal registration requirement.
o Supporting and leveraging the efforts of approximately 26,192 part-time
uncompensated civilian volunteer registrars in high schools, at job training sites,
in the Federal Bureau of Prisons and State Correction Institutions, and at National
Farm-Worker Jobs locations, to generate awareness of the registration
requirement and promote compliance among their constituencies.

•

Assuming wholesale responsibility for the administration and management of all
means and methods of registration: an on-line registration-capable web-site;
automatic registration via electronic data exchanges with federal and state agencies
(including more than 40 state Departments of Motor Vehicles); the Interactive Voice
Response system and Call Center; and the printing and mailing of paper draft

72

Kamarck, Issues for Congress, 25.
Supra pp. 3-5. We believe it likely that DoD’s assumption of the registration function would require significant
legislative and regulatory action to modify the MSSA and its implementing regulations.
73

21

 registration packets to eligible males and distribution of paper forms to U.S. Post
Offices.
o developing and sustaining interagency data exchange agreements and Memoranda
of Understanding with the panoply of federal and state agencies that enable
automatic registration and routinely share data with the registration database.
o preparing and mailing approximately 2.3 million registration acknowledgment
letters each year to new registrants.
o identifying and taking appropriate action to address instances of registration noncompliance.
•

Assuming responsibility for the administration and management of one of the largest
databases of personally-identifiable information in the federal government. This
would include all Chief Information Officer and network security functions, the
requirement to maintain and update information technology hardware and software
applications to ensure continuous operation of the system and its relational data base,
and ensuring system connectivity with authorized federal and state agency
stakeholders for purposes of data exchange.
o ensuring the accuracy and completeness of data maintained in the registration
database, by cross-checking and validating information from individuals who
register via electronic means, preventing fraudulent registrations, identifying
deceased individuals, and correcting inaccurate personal information.
o responding timely to requests from federal and state agencies to verify a
registration, with a view to determining eligibility for benefits linked to the
selective service registration requirement.

•

Responding to inquiries from registrants, the public, Congress, and the media.

Some have proposed that the personal data needed to inform a future draft could be
acquired from other federal or state government databases, augmented by the purchase of thirdparty commercial datasets—a “big data” model. The current registration database relies
extensively on information collected and shared by other federal and state entities, which is
routinely validated and cross-checked by the SSS for accuracy and completeness. But because
each federal agency’s information systems include only that data related to the persons with
whom that agency engages in the conduct of its particular mission, no single agency database is
likely to be complete for purposes of a draft; each list would likely exclude some draft-eligible
individuals. A cursory assessment leads to a preliminary conclusion that, at the present time,
reliance on other existing government and/or commercial databases to generate a definitive list
of draft-eligible youth would: raise privacy concerns; inject uncertainties as to data quality and
completeness that would bear on the fairness and equity of the draft writ large; and potentially
effect the missions of participating government agencies adversely as individuals sought to avoid
inclusion on the list of potential draftees. 74
74

Kamarck, Issues for Congress, p. 25. Although a study of some vintage, in 1978, the Congressional Budget
Office (CBO) proposed automatic registration of eligible persons by merging existing data on file with the Social
Security System and Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The CBO report suggested that such a list might miss as many
as 40 percent of eligible registrants. Further, IRS officials were concerned that such an approach would raise the
level of tax evasion by those seeking to avoid draft registration.

22

 Systems, Manpower, and Facilities needed by DoD to Mobilize Inductees
in the Absence of the SSS
We begin this section’s discussion by reiterating the Department’s stalwart belief in the
value of maintaining a clear distinction between the DoD and the administration of the Nation’s
conscription processes.
For the first half of the 20th century, the military establishment was responsible for the
operation of the national draft. These Byzantine drafts 75 suffered from a dearth of consistency in
the administration of postponements, deferments, and exemptions; the maltreatment of
conscientious objectors; and lottery and quota systems racked by cronyism. At times, the chance
of being drafted varied by state, by local community, and by one’s economic status, fostering
near-universal perceptions of a lack of fairness and equity. 76 The MSSA’s establishment of an
independent agency charged to administer the mass mobilization process was an unequivocal
statement of Congress’s intent to rectify these ills. The “separation of powers” between DoD
and the execution of the draft—codified in the MSSA—is essential to maintaining public trust in
the fundamental fairness of the process, confidence in the system, and willingness to participate.
Vesting in DoD the responsibility for mobilizing inductees has the potential to compromise the
draft process, diminish the Department’s effectiveness, and divert DoD senior leader attention
from the grave national security challenges at hand during a mass mobilization.
Over the years, the SSS has developed a complex, yet methodical process to achieve the fair,
orderly, time-phased induction of large numbers of men, with parallel tracking and processes for
deferred inductions and reclassified personnel. In responding to this question, DoD presumed
that it would assume responsibility for the mobilization function as it currently exists, as detailed
in this report. 77 This report does not purport to envision how DoD might otherwise execute the
mobilization function. While there would be no necessity for DoD to do things exactly as they
have been done in the past, the SSS experience provides the only model presently available for
dealing with these requirements. In the absence of a comprehensive study beyond the scope of
this report, DoD takes no position on whether the current mass mobilization system and process
could or should be modified. We look forward to participating in a broader national dialogue on
these issues, to be fostered by the work of the National Commission on Military, National, and
Public Service.
In the absence of the SSS, DoD would need the following systems, manpower, and
facilities to mobilize inductees.
Systems
Were DoD required to assume the mass mobilization functions presently under the
auspices of the SSS, it would presumably need to inherit or replicate the capabilities of existing
SSS systems, inclusive of the current public website and specialized Information Technology
75

Carter, 99 Problems.
Kamarck, Issues for Congress, p. 8.
77
Infra pp. 6-9, 23-25, 31-34. We believe it likely that DoD’s assumption of the mass mobilization function would
require significant legislative and regulatory action to modify the MSSA and its implementing regulations.
76

23

 systems and databases, many of which are described earlier in this report. In addition, DoD
would assume responsibility for the Integrated Mobilization Information System (IMIS) to
facilitate management of the more than 11,000 local board members, accession requirements,
and Reserve Force Officer administration, as well as for the Central Registrant Processing Portal,
which builds on IMIS as the system of record for the management of information related to the
induction process.
Manpower
The SSS reports that in peacetime it is manned by about 125 full-time civilian employees
assigned to its national and region headquarters. In addition, 56 part-time State Directors,
appointed by their State Governors, oversee selective service activities in every state, territory,
and the District of Columbia. These civilians support a field structure grounded in 2,069 local
boards staffed with 11,000 volunteer board members—located in almost every county of the
United States and its territories. 96 District Appeal Boards and one National Appeal Board
provide avenues of redress for registrants dissatisfied with decisions at the local board level.
In keeping with SSS plans, in the event of a mass mobilization, DoD would recruit,
onboard, train, and sustain more than 500 Reserve Force Officers, 1,500 military retirees recalled
to duty, 700 State Resource Volunteers, and 6,500 newly hired federal employees, to support the
execution of a draft. Manpower augmentee assignments during a mass mobilization are
projected as follows:
National headquarters
Region headquarters
State headquarters
Area Offices
Alternative Service Offices
Liaisons at MEPS stations
Reserve Force Officers
Retiree recalls

724 personnel (1 location)
531 personnel (3 locations)
784 personnel (56 locations)
4,360 personnel (436 locations)
576 personnel (48 locations)
65 personnel
504 personnel
1,500 personnel

Management of the Alternative Service Program would warrant special DoD attention.
When properly classified by a local board in the context of a mass mobilization, conscientious
objectors are required to fulfill their service obligation in a civilian capacity that contributes to
the maintenance of the national health, safety, or interest. DoD would be responsible for
maintaining alternative service policies and procedures, building the Alternative Service
Employer Network, and interfacing with religious institutions and the conscientious objector
community. 78
Facilities
DoD would assume responsibility for managing the facilities housing the SSS National
headquarters and 3 Region headquarters. 56 State headquarters would be established at
designated National Guard armories, and 436 Area Offices would operate from select recruiting
78

32 Code of Federal Regulations, part 1656.2.

24

 station offices across the United States. 48 Alternative Service Offices would be co-located with
designated Area Offices to administer the Alternative Service Program for conscientious
objectors.
The MSSA and federal regulations 79 mandate the establishment of one or more local
boards in each county or political subdivision of the United States. Each of the 2,069 local
boards presently in existence performs its official duties at sites within the jurisdiction for which
it is established. DoD would coordinate site location and support requirements through servicing
Area Office personnel, assigned Reserve Force Officers, and local government authorities.
Additional facilities would be required for the 96 District Appeal Boards, the National
Appeal Board, and various other supporting elements.
Feasibility and Utility of Eliminating the Current Focus on Mass Mobilization of Primarily
Combat Troops in Favor of a System that Focuses on Mobilization of Military
Occupational Specialties
The current registration requirement and systems for mass mobilization are designed to
provide a fair and equitable process by which individuals are generally conscripted as “untrained
manpower,” without regard to their individual skills or abilities. We will never know with
certainty how an enemy might fight or precisely what demands a future conflict might place on
our forces; we must guard against a presumption that future wars will be “just like the last.” 80
The particular skills needed by DoD and the Military Services in the event of a national
emergency will vary with the nature of the crisis. For example: 81
•

The changing shape of future wars may require conscripting the nation’s best experts
at code writing, hacking, and cyber security to rapidly build a world-class cadre of
cyber warriors.

•

There might be an immediate need to put financial experts and market analysts into
uniform to help protect the nation from potentially disruptive economic warfare.

•

The military might need to mobilize social media experts who can understand and
undercut the insidious messaging of highly sophisticated adversaries aiming to
inflame and radicalize populations at home and abroad.

This reality prompts questions as to the feasibility and utility of targeting the draft
process to specific military occupation specialties (MOSs) that may be of particular necessity or
high-value in the prosecution of a given conflict, similar to recruiting practices that have been
used with some success to target persons with “high-demand, low-density” skills for enlistment
in the AVF.

79

32 Code of Federal Regulations, part 1605.51.
Barno and Bensahel, Mirages of War.
81
These examples are excerpted directly from Barno and Bensahel, Why We Still Need the Draft.
80

25

 A targeted draft focusing on specific MOSs is feasible, but would add significant
complexity to registration and mobilization processes. More important is the understanding that
applying qualitative conscription criteria to some, inevitably devolves into de facto exemptions
for others. 82 Significant thought and effort would need to be devoted to countering the specter of
an unfair and inequitable draft raised by the use of targeted mobilization. By segregating
elements of society by intellect; skill, education or achievement in the desired discipline; or
experience— the perennial question of “who serves when not all serve?” takes on a new
connotation. Those who meet the military’s particular need would be conscripted to serve; those
who do not would go home. It has also been suggested that a targeted draft could prove an
inefficient use of high-value labor, “indiscriminately compelling employment in the military
regardless [of the fact that that even in the context of a national emergency, the] individual could
have much greater value to our society elsewhere.” 83
Mobilization of General Combat Forces
Under current law, the SSS will provide trained and untrained manpower to DoD in a
national emergency, when directed by the President and Congress. Although all 18-25 year old
males are required to register with selective service, not all will serve. In a mass mobilization,
the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness would submit military
manpower induction requirements through the U.S. Military Entrance Processing Command
(MEPCOM) to the Director of the SSS. The specific induction requirement would be
extrapolated to identify the number of men who must be called up to achieve the desired end
state, and define the timeline for processing and inducting them. The mass mobilization system
is both flexible and scalable, designed to adapt to the volume and immediacy of the requirement
presented. The MEPS receive manpower from the SSS, examine each registrant who presents to
determine his physical, mental, moral, and administrative qualifications for military service, and
induct qualified registrants into military service, before moving them onward to their Service
military reception center for training. 84
Past practice and current plans envision two methods for processing registrants. Using a
“one-step” process, the SSS would deliver a fixed number of registrants to each MEPS daily, in
accordance with a predetermined order of call based on age cohort, lottery selection, and random
sequence. The MEPS will administer the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery
(ASVAB) and necessary Service-specific specialty tests, conduct a physical examination, induct
qualified men into their respective Services, and provide for their immediate movement to
training. Applying the “two-step” method, the SSS would deliver a fixed number of registrants
to each MEPS for aptitude testing, medical examination, and moral qualifications assessment.
Although the progression of registrants through the MEPS station mirrors the “one-step” method,
at the “end of the day”, registrants return home to await induction at a later date, as determined
by the SSS and their respective Services. In the interim, postponement, deferment, and

82

Carter, 99 Problems.
Id. See also Kamarck, Issues for Congress, p. 23.
84
Army Regulation 601-270, OPNAVINST 1100.4C CH-2, AFI 36-2003_IP, MCO 1100.75, COMDTINST M
1100.2E Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS)(Washington, DC: Department of Defense, September 13,
2011), p. 1.
83

26

 exemption claims are adjudicated, and potential medical or conduct disqualifications are
resolved. 85
Although most of these inductees likely will be used to fill the ranks of combat units,
MEPS testing is generally capable of identifying those with special skills or aptitude for a
particular military occupation for which there is a need. Those so identified may be trained and
utilized accordingly.
Mobilization by Military Occupational Specialties
“Conscription in the future could look very different than the draft calls of Korea or
Vietnam”. 86 Those who would threaten our national security wear many faces; the dangers they
would unleash take many forms. Countering those bad actors and the threats they pose may
require a fighting force not based solely on combat power, as was the case in the last century.
But the 21st-century, cutting edge human capital so crucial to success in a major war of the future
will not likely be found in our military of today. 87 Scrambling to identify, locate, and induct
experts from scratch in the middle of a crisis mobilization would take too long, at a time when
every day counts. Thus, there is some appeal to the idea of structuring a mobilization process to
target and render up those with unique skills and capabilities relevant to the crisis at hand, in
other words, “drafting to need.” Secretary of Defense James Mattis signaled his interest in such
an approach, when, in response to written question posed by the Senate Armed Services
Committee in advance of his confirmation hearing he stated, “I will direct the Department to
determine which needed skills are anticipated and pass those requirements to the Selective
Service.”
In its simplest form, rather than trusting to chance and presuming that each cohort of
registrants that passes through a MEPS for examination and induction will possess, in the
aggregate, the right mix of skills and experience that DoD needs, a targeted draft could focus on
using information in the registration database to identify and cull for induction, those individuals
with the knowledge, skills, and abilities associated with specific MOSs in demand. Populating
the selective service registration database, well in advance of a crisis, with information requisite
to the identification of “experts” in a wide variety of disciplines, would be integral to such a
plan. 88
The registration database maintains basic information comprising a registrant “profile” on
men between the ages of 18 and 26. At initial registration, the individual could be required to
report data reflecting his profession, skill certifications, conferred degrees, and licenses for
inclusion in his profile. Given the relative youth of most of the registrant population,
information of this sort is likely to be scant, however. 89 With successive periodic updates to the

85

Ibid at p. 18.
Barno and Bensahel, Why We Still Need the Draft.
87
Id.
88
A broad-brush approach to collecting and recording information about a wide variety of skill categories would
render it more likely that the registration database would be useful for a targeted draft going forward.
89
Currently, the only profile information routinely updated is the registrant’s “current address”, changes in which
are required to be reported within 10 days of a move. New address information is also collected and validated
86

27

 “critical skills” section of the profile—perhaps every two to three years, continuing even after
the registrant is no longer in the primary draft pool—the foundation of a targeted draft could be
established and sit ready for years. A major deficit of this method is that to maintain the
functionality of the database, every American male would have to update his skills competencies
with selective service on a regular basis, over most of his adult life. Further, efforts to mandate
reporting of this additional information are likely to meet with widespread objection because of
perceived infringements on privacy rights and civil liberties. Given the level of detail in the
information required, the periodicity of updates, the length of the reporting period, and the
likelihood of public opposition to the proposal, securing the level of compliance necessary to
ensure the accuracy and completeness of the database, and enforcing penalties for noncompliance, would present significant challenges.
And, given that females are not authorized to register for the draft, there would be no
mechanism by which to collect and maintain a record of their professions, skills, academic
degrees, and licenses—even were use of the information intended only for voluntary recruitment
purposes. This would prove an unfortunate omission. A targeted draft in a future war would
presumptively focus on highly technical skills in short supply in the labor market as a whole.
The percent of individuals qualified in such skills is unlikely to be as variable by gender as are
the combat MOSs. Accordingly, targeting a draft to only 50 percent of the available population
would severely limit success.
Considering other options, in past conflicts, state medical licensing boards arranged to
provide licensing lists to the SSS as means of identifying health care providers. Similar
“partnering” arrangements could be negotiated with licensing and credentialing boards
associated with other disciplines, professional organizations, academic institutions, and private
industry, to share data about individuals with particular high-value skills. For example, the
American Society for Civil Engineers or the National Society of Professional Engineers could
provide the SSS with information about their members specializing in the management of
electric grids or the build-out of transportation infrastructures. Microsoft and Cisco Systems
could yield a cadre of trained software engineers and coders. Adding information about these
individual’s specialties to their profile in the selective service registration database would allow
for easy retrieval, by area of expertise, when needed by DoD in a national emergency. Of
course, any such endeavor would likely raise privacy and other civil liberties concerns. Absent
Congressional engagement, these “partnering” arrangements would rely on voluntary disclosures
by boards, professional organizations, academia, and industry. Their willingness to participate
should not be presumed. Finally, given that only males participate in the registration database,
even were such information to be made available, there would be no means of recording and
maintaining it for similarly expert females. Once again, this constraint would limit the military’s
ability to identify the right expert, with the right skills, for use in the right place, at the right time.
Also, it is important to note that any mass mobilization process in which only those with
critical skills are subject to draft will be pilloried as inequitable and unfair. Efforts to evade
would be commonplace, and—given that the information on which the draft would rely could be
obtained only through voluntary disclosure—more often than not, successful.
through SSS data exchanges with other federal and state agencies. The remaining information—name and social
security number—is unlikely to change with the passage of years.

28

 Taking another tack, the examination phase of the induction process could be modified to
permit a more robust assessment of a registrant’s skills and capabilities, earlier in the
mobilization timeline. DoD would be required to identify, in advance, the critical skills and
occupations known or projected to require expert manning. A structured interview, designed to
elicit detailed information about the registrant’s profession, skills, academic degrees, and
licenses; a post call-up review of the registrant’s selective service database profile; and
consideration of the results of pinpoint aptitude tests, in addition to ASVAB scores, could
identify those well suited for the high-value MOSs needed by DoD. Those registrants would be
separated from the cohort for special processing and channeled expeditiously to required
training. Although this method likely would not work with a one-step induction process, the
two-step process could prove more adaptable. The time required to conduct detailed interviews
and the timing, logistics, and expense of pinpoint aptitude testing could prove challenging,
however. Nonetheless, this approach would probably be viewed as “more” fair and equitable,
because an individual’s identification for MOS targeting would occur only after he already had
been selected for draft by regular random processes. Given that the pool of individuals
considered for channeling to special skills occupations would not include men not yet drafted
and would include no women at all, the chance of identifying an individual with the particular
expertise needed still would be limited.
The Health Care Professional Delivery System (HCPDS) 90 is yet another model for the
induction of persons with special skills and qualifications. HCPDS is a standby plan developed
at the request of Congress that could be used to draft health care personnel in a crisis. 91 No
portion of the plan is intended for peacetime implementation; the plan could be implemented in
connection with mass mobilization in a national emergency, but only if Congress and the
President pass and sign legislation to enact it. Further, the HCPDS plan would be activated only
if the military’s existing medical capability proved insufficient and there was a shortage of
volunteers. If implemented, HCPDS would provide a fair and equitable draft of medical
personnel from the existing civilian pool of 3.4 million doctors, nurses, specialists, and allied
health professionals in more than 60 fields of medicine. Implementation would begin with the
mass registration of both male and female 92 health care workers between the ages of 20 and 45.
The draft would call a very small percentage of these into military service. The impact of the
draft on the availability of civilian health care would be minimal; those health-care workers
whose absence would seriously hurt their communities would be deferred on the basis of
community essentiality. 93 The benefits of this approach are that registration, which in itself can
be controversial, takes place only after an emergency is declared and the President and Congress
act affirmatively to implement the plan. Because the ages of those required to register span a
greater period of years, and females are included in the process, the pool of specialists is broader
and more representative of all those with the requisite skill sets. And, because the pool is larger,
90

Throughout the Vietnam conflict, the SSS located doctors and nurses by scouring state medical licensing boards.
They were offered an officer’s commission and a two-year service commitment. According to lore, some 83 of
these 30,000 individuals actually refused the offer. They were drafted anyway and put in the Army as buck privates,
the military’s lowest rank.
91
In 1987, Congress enacted Public Law 100-180, codified at 50 USC Appendix, Section 460(h), ordering the SSS
to prepare contingency plans for HCPDS.
92
Female health care professionals would be included in the registration and draft unless the President or Congress
directed otherwise.
93
Selective Service System website, https://www.sss.gov/About/Medical-Draft-in-Standby-Mode.

29

 the chance that any single individual will be selected for draft is less, and the greater the
likelihood that the process will be perceived as fair and equitable. Because they are already
skilled personnel, HCPDS draftees would require minimal training, allowing them to take their
place in the force almost immediately. Finally, the exemption process expressly weighs the
needs of the community, blunting across-the-board assertions that these professionals would be
of greater benefit to national security in their civilian capacities.
Finally, a “draft” targeted at particular skills should never forswear the benefits of
incentivized volunteerism. For example: 94
•

Older civilian experts in particular disciplines could be requested to pre-register (i.e.,
if you are of a certain age and within the past 12 months you have worked in the
following fields, you are encouraged to register), so that the SSS could locate them
quickly in the event of an emergency. These older recruits could be permitted to
serve as civilians—enabling them to serve without committing to the full rigors of
military life, and their period of obligation limited to a short-term stretch of perhaps
six months, renewable at the individual’s election.

•

Skill-targeted conscripts could be “drafted” into the Reserve Components, and
authorized to split time between their uniformed and civilian jobs, leveraging skills
from both.

•

Specialists who volunteer could be offered an incentive package that will differentiate
between classes of service. Serve at home providing healthcare, and you get some
credit for doing so. Serve in the military and deploy into harm’s way, and you’ll earn
a more generous package of educational and economic benefits.

DoD Manpower Needs in an Emergency Requiring Mass Mobilization
As far back as 1994, a DoD bottom-up review stated, “[w]e will never know with
certainty how an enemy might fight or precisely what demands might be placed on our own
forces in the future.” In an uncertain world, maintaining the systems, manpower, and
infrastructure required to conduct a draft will enable the country to mobilize parts or all of
society, as needed to counter the catastrophe yet unenvisioned. The vast pool of human
capability represented in and by the selective service registration database mitigates risk to the
Nation, standing ready to be called to bridge a gap between the AVF and the force requirements
of a future conflict, the demands of which we cannot predict.
A June 2012 Government Accountability Office (GAO) review recommended that the
Department establish a process for “periodically reevaluating DoD’s requirements for the SSS in
light of changing threats, operating environments, and strategic guidance.” 95 In February 2013,

94

These examples are excerpted directly from Barno and Bensahel, Why We Still Need the Draft.
U.S. Government Accountability Office, DoD Should Reevaluate Requirements for the Selective Service System,
(Washington, DC: U.S. Government Accountability Office, June 2012), p. 16.
95

30

 then-Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness and Force Management
Frederick Vollrath, responded to GAO on behalf of the Department, stating:
“Currently the AVF is of adequate size and composition to meet the Department’s
demands, and the Department has no operational plans that envision mobilization
at a level that would require conscription.
...
There would be merit in a thorough assessment of this issue, to include a review
of the statutes and polices surrounding the current registration process, and the
potential to include the registration of women. This review is part of a much
broader national discussion and should not be solely determined by DoD.
However, the Department stands ready to participate in such a review.” 96
In March 2014, then-Acting Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness
Jessica L. Wright, responded to questions posed by the Senate Armed Services Committee,
advising, “[d]uring our 2013 Government Accountability Office audit, DoD was asked to
reevaluate the mission and military requirements for the Selective Service. We found that the
changes in the world following the end of the Cold War have revised our mobilization
requirements. As such, the Department has no operational plans that envision mobilization at a
level that would require conscription. However, we contend that although there may be no
immediate military necessity, there continue to be national necessities for continuation of the
SSS.” 97
Timeline
The DoD currently has no operational plans that envision mobilization at a level that
would require conscription. 98 At this time, should a national emergency so require, the
Department would rely on the SSS and its current plans, policies, and procedures. The timeline
begins when Congress amends Section 17(c) of the MSSA to authorize the President to induct
personnel into the Armed Forces, and the President issues follow-on directives governing the
mass mobilization process. The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness would submit military manpower induction requirements through MEPCOM to the
Director of the SSS. The specific induction requirement would be extrapolated to identify the
number of men who must be called up to achieve the desired end state, and define the timeline
for processing and inducting them. The mass mobilization system is both flexible and scalable,
designed to adapt to the volume and immediacy of the requirement presented. Generally, as
reported by the SSS, the phased timeline for mobilization would proceed as follows:

96
Letter to Director, Capabilities and Management, Government Accountability Office, from Frederick E. Vollrath,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness and Force Management, Office of the Secretary of
Defense, February 26, 2013.
97
Acting Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Jessica L. Wright, “Response to SASC Question
#91”, March 26, 2014.
98
Joint Staff J-5, November 17, 2016.

31

 •

Days 1-5. The 56 State Directors and 175 Reserve Force Officers are activated.
Concurrently, the SSS Region headquarters are expanded and the State headquarters
are established.

•

Days 6-45. The national draft lottery is conducted. An additional 329 Reserve Force
Officers and 1,500 retired National Guard members are recalled to active duty to
support Area Offices. The SSS receives authority for the expedited hire of more than
6,500 full-time employees. In communities across the country, more than 11,000
local board members are notified to report for duty.

•

Days 46-85. The 436 Area Offices and 48 Alternative Service Offices are established
and operational. Initial and refresher training for local board members and new
civilian employee hires is completed.
o The first 100,000 or more registrants receive a notice to report to the MEPS for
examination. Notice is mailed to the most recent address for the registrant as
recorded in the registration database.

•

Days 85-100. The first local board meeting takes place. The 96 District Appeal
Boards, consisting of 480 members, and the National Appeal Board, consisting of
three or more Presidential appointees and 10 full-time employees, are activated.
o Area Offices receive their first claims for postponement, deferral, or exemption.

•

Days 101-150. The first meetings of the District Appeal Boards and the National
Appeal Board take place.

•

Day 183. The first induction notifications are mailed.

•

Day 193. The first inductees report to the MEPS for transport to their Service
military reception center.

•

Day 210. The first 100,000 inductees report for service.

•

Day 222. The first medical personnel report for service.

32

 Figure 2 depicts the notional SSS mobilization timeline in graphic form.
Figure 2: Notional SSS Mobilization Timeline

100,000+ inductees report to military reception center

210

193

First inductee reports to MEPS; awaiting
transportation to military reception center

210

183

First induction notifications mailed

180

150
101-150

First claim received by Area Office
First opportunity to submit a claim
for postponement, deferment,
or exemption
First registrant reports to MEPS
First examination
notifications
mailed to
100,000+
registrants
with low
lottery
numbers

30

1-5

120

6-45

First meetings of Local Boards
Activation of 96 District Appeal Boards (480 members)
Activation of National Appeal Board (3+ POTUS
appointees and 10 FTEs)

85-100

90
46-85

60

First meetings of District Appeal
Boards and National Appeal Board

436 Area Offices and 50 Alternative Service Offices operational
Initial/refresher training for Local Boards and new hires completed

NATIONAL DRAFT LOTTERY
Activation of additional 329 Reserve Force Officers and 1,500 retired
National Guard members to support Area Offices
Emergency hiring authority for 6,500+ FTEs
Notification of 11,000+ Local Board members

Activation of 56 State Directors and 175 Reserve Force Officers
Expansion of Region Headquarters and establishment of State Headquarters

Congress amends Section 17(c) of the MSSA to authorize the President to induct personnel into the Armed Forces.

The Alternative Service Program is activated on a similar timeline. An individual
granted conscientious objector status would be processed and enrolled for employment through
the Alternative Service Employment Network at generally the same rate as an inductee is
processed for entry into military service.
The information above reflects the notional timeline established by the SSS. We note,
however, the findings of a 2012 GAO review, advising that “[a]ccording to official
spokespersons for the SSS, the agency is not currently resourced to meet DoD’s requirement for

33

 it to deliver the first inductees in 193 days and 100,000 inductees in 210 days, without
jeopardizing the fairness and equity of the draft.” 99
Additional Critical Skills Needed
The DoD currently has no operational plans that envision mobilization at a level that
would require conscription. 100 At present, the only plan for a separate registration and
mobilization process targeting critical skills focuses on health care personnel. 101 We will never
know with certainty how an enemy might fight or precisely what demands might be placed on
our own forces in the future. Other critical skills needed in the event of a national emergency
will depend on the threat we face, but certainly could extend to cyber specialists, drone
operators, technical and scientific experts, and linguists. Other more prosaic skills: expertise in
rapid road and rail logistics, fuel distribution and water purification, and policing and physical
security, also could be deemed critical, depending on the nature of the conflict, the mission,
environment, and other factors.
Assumptions Used by the Department
•

For the purpose of this report, the term “mass mobilization” refers to the activation of
conscription or a military draft.

•

Mass mobilization will be properly authorized by law and Presidential directive.
Legal authorities will be available to support mobilization processes. Adequate
funding and manpower will be available to execute the induction of untrained
manpower (general registrants) and/or the registration and induction of health care
personnel.

•

The entry processing capability of MEPCOM is 18,000 registrants per day,
presuming adequate augmentation of manpower and facilities. Accessions will be
inducted or enlisted/appointed and transported to designated Service training
centers/duty stations identified by the Office of the Secretary of Defense or the
appropriate Service.

•

The SSS will adjust its master data file to remove from the list of eligible draftees
those individuals reported by MEPCOM as already having been accessed by a
Military Service. The Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) will report to the
SSS the names of personnel with less than 1 year of service who have been
discharged or transferred to a Reserve Component for the convenience of the
government. DMDC’s report will include the length of each individual’s service and
characterization of discharge.

99

U.S. Government Accountability Office, DoD Should Reevaluate Requirements for the Selective Service System,
(Washington, DC: U.S. Government Accountability Office, June 2012), p. 7.
100
Joint Staff J-5, November 17, 2016.
101
Supra p. 29.

34

 •

Conduct of the credentialing process for health care personnel, including the review
and validation of professional licenses, diplomas, training certificates, and related
materials, is the responsibility of the individual Military Service. The Services will
provide qualified representatives at each MEPS to credential and determine the
appropriate military pay grade of each health care professional prior to induction or
commission.

•

Lead-time permitting, the SSS will first use a two-step examination and induction
process for both general and health care registrants, with only those deemed qualified
for military service subsequently ordered for induction. Given insufficient lead-time,
however, SSS would employ the one-step examination and induction process, then
shift to a two-step process, as time and the number of inductees permit. Both large
and small volume deliveries of registrants to DoD for induction processing can be
managed under either process.

Conclusion

Throughout most of the 20th century, the laws of the United States have obligated male
citizens and residents to register for a draft administered by an agency of the federal government.
The DoD currently has no operational plans that envision mobilization at a level that would
require conscription. Even in the face of sustained conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, DoD has
maintained its ability to recruit and retain a professional volunteer force without resorting to a
draft. Nonetheless, the potential for global conflict on the scale of another world war still exists.
Every Administration since 1980 has made the conscious decision to maintain national
registration for selective service as the tool through which Congress and the President would
provide additional manpower to the Armed Forces—an “insurance policy”—should future
threats spark requirements for forces in excess of those available to the AVF.
The SSS is an independent federal agency within the executive branch, headquartered in
Arlington, Virginia. Since 1973, the MSSA has designated the SSS as an “active standby”
organization, with the mission to: maintain a complete registration and classification structure
capable of immediate operation in the event of a national emergency (including a structure for
the registration and classification of persons qualified for employment in a health care
occupation essential to the maintenance of the Armed Forces); and maintain personnel adequate
to reconstitute immediately the full operations of the mass mobilization system, including trained
volunteers, military reservists and military retirees.
A number of benefits derive, both directly and indirectly, from the military selective
service system. Primarily, selective service guarantees the certain and timely fulfillment of
military manpower requirements in a national emergency. Also of significance, the selective
service registration database provides valuable military recruiting leads. In a more indirect vein,
registration reminds America’s youth of the importance of Military, National, and Public Service
and the existence of a draft serves as a critical link between the AVF and society at large.
Finally, military selective service is both a symbol of our national will and a deterrent to
potential enemies of the United States.

35

 Under current law, women may serve voluntarily in the U.S. Armed Forces but are not,
and never have been, required to register for selective service. Since the ban on women in
combat was lifted, the merits of including women in the requirement to register for the draft have
been hotly debated in the media and in the halls of Congress. It appears that, for the most part,
expanding registration for the draft to include women would enhance further the benefits
presently associated with the selective service system. Opening registration to all members of
the population aged 18-25—regardless of gender—would convey the added benefit of promoting
fairness and equity not previously possible in the process and would comport the military
selective service system with our nation’s touchstone values of fair and equitable treatment, and
equality of opportunity.
Maintaining the clear distinction between the DoD and the administration of the Nation’s
selective service system ensures the preeminence of civilian control and has historically been
viewed as important to the public’s perception of the draft process as fair and equitable. DoD
believes that there is great wisdom and value in sustaining this “separation of powers.” This
report does not purport to envision how DoD might otherwise execute the registration and mass
mobilization functions. In the absence of a comprehensive study and a broader national dialogue
on the issues, DoD takes no position on whether the current national registration system and
mobilization process could or should be modified.
The current registration requirement and systems for mass mobilization are designed to
provide a fair and equitable process by which individuals are generally conscripted as “untrained
manpower,” without regard to their individual skills or abilities. We will never know with
certainty how an enemy might fight or precisely what demands a future conflict might place on
our forces. The particular skills needed by DoD and the Military Services in the event of a
national emergency will vary with the nature of the crisis. A targeted draft focusing on specific
MOSs is feasible, but would add significant complexity to registration and mobilization
processes. Significant thought and effort would need to be devoted to countering the specter of
an unfair and inequitable draft raised by the use of targeted mobilization.
One option might be that at initial registration, the individual could be required to report
data reflecting his profession, skill certifications, conferred degrees, and licenses for inclusion in
his selective service profile. With successive periodic updates to the “critical skills” section of
the profile—perhaps every two to three years, continuing even after the registrant is no longer in
the primary draft pool—the foundation of a targeted draft could be established and sit ready for
years. “Partnering” arrangements could be negotiated with licensing and credentialing boards
associated with other disciplines, professional organizations, academic institutions, and private
industry, to share data about individuals with particular high-value skills.
Taking yet another tack, the examination phase of the induction process could be
modified to permit a more robust assessment of a registrant’s skills and capabilities, earlier in the
mobilization timeline. Those registrants identified through structured interviews and aptitude
testing as possessing special skills would be separated from their MEPS cohort for special
processing and channeled expeditiously to required training. This approach would probably be
viewed as “more” fair and equitable, because an individual’s identification for MOS targeting
would occur only after he already had been selected for draft by regular random processes.

36

 HCPDS is yet another model for the induction of persons with special skills and
qualifications. HCPDS is a standby plan developed at the request of Congress that could be used
to draft health care personnel in a crisis. Finally, a “draft” targeted at particular skills should
never forswear the benefits of incentivized volunteerism.
Given that females are not authorized to register for the draft, there would be no
mechanism by which to collect and maintain a record of their professions, skills, academic
degrees, and licenses—even were use of the information intended only for voluntary recruitment
purposes. This would prove an unfortunate omission. A targeted draft in a future war would
presumptively focus on highly technical skills in short supply in the labor market as a whole.
The percent of individuals qualified in such skills is unlikely to be as variable by gender as are
the combat MOSs. Accordingly, targeting a draft to 50 percent of the available population—
males only—would severely constrain success.
A June 2012 GAO review recommended that the Department establish a process for
“periodically reevaluating DoD’s requirements for the SSS in light of changing threats, operating
environments, and strategic guidance.” The Department has consistently responded to such
recommendations by advising that the AVF is currently of adequate size and composition to
meet the Department’s demands, and that we have no operational plans that envision
mobilization at a level that would require conscription. At the same time, the Department
acknowledges the merit of a thorough assessment of this issue, to include a review of the statutes
and polices surrounding the current registration process, and the potential to include the
registration of women. Any such review should be part of a much broader national discussion
and should not be solely determined by DoD.
Finally, at this time, should a national emergency so require, the Department would rely
on the SSS and its current plans, policies, and procedures to execute a mass mobilization.

37