Top GOP senator on Armed Services Committee opposes proposed changes to military draft registration and having women drafted

The top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee strongly opposes making changes to the Selective Service System that would allow men to be automatically registered for the draft when they turn 18, casting doubt the proposal could become law even though the Democratic chairman of the panel said the idea has merit and it was approved overwhelmingly by the GOP-led House Armed Services Committee.

The top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee strongly opposes making changes to the Selective Service System that would allow men to be automatically registered for the draft when they turn 18, casting doubt the proposal could become law even though the Democratic chairman of the panel said the idea has merit and it was approved overwhelmingly by the GOP-led House Armed Services Committee. “It just seems to me right now we don’t need to cloud the NDAA with something that’s not likely to happen in the next several years. We are not going to need a draft anytime soon,” Republican Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi told CNN, while arguing Washington shouldn’t be distracted right now from its most important responsibility, which is standing up to urgent threats from international foes. At issue is a proposal championed by Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, a Democrat from Pennsylvania and veteran of the Air Force, who pushed to add to the House’s version of the National Defense Authorization Act language requiring men to be automatically registered for the draft based on existing federal records instead of registering themselves when they turn 18. Doing so could increase compliance and save money that is now used for outreach efforts to encourage men to register voluntarily. The House NDAA passed out of committee on a broad 57-1 vote. It passed the full House on a more party line 217-199 vote. Sen. Jack Reed, a Democrat of Rhode Island, who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he was only “vaguely aware” of the House proposal but said it might be worth doing. “I think that is something we have to look at,” he said. “Presumably, if there is some data to show that it’s more efficient way to do it I don’t see a problem with it.”