Applying for FAFSA was a required part of the application process for public universities and most private ones, meaning that nearly all amabs applying for college were automatically enrolled by this process…
until they simplified FAFSA in 2020, which I just learned about when acquiring the link above as a citation.
This bill would reinstate and expand automatic enrollment to amabs who don’t need FAFSA or who don’t want to go to college.
So they are trying to change the conditions for automatic enrollment from “has a penis and wants to go to college” (precovid) to just “has a penis”.
Seems like a pretty good Common Sense legislation really. You already have to register by law so making it automatic would be easier for all of us and avoid anyone getting in trouble for something stupid. I don't see a downside to this. I would like to see it apply to voting registration too however.
Well, voting registration as it's implemented in America isn't exactly in vogue. As in "oh, you just need to get an ID to vote from now on." And people without ID need to do some extra paperwork and the office is open 5 minutes every other week, just go through the door located behind the acid moat and bear traps.
Over here in Finland: Government has a comprehensive record of citizens, they know where everyone lives and who's eligible to vote. So they send you a letter. "Here's how to do the advance voting, here's the polling location you need to go to on election day, Also here's how to draw the numbers, so this will be less confusing. Just bring this notice card with you. And an ID. If you don't have an ID, visit the police station and they'll give you one for free."
In Italy, you have to travel to whatever city you have residence in to vote. A lot of (mostly progressive) people have to fly across the country to cast their vote, apparently it sucks for them
Technically, the USA already required you to sign up for the draft right around the time you received your Social Security Card. The draft has not been used since 1973 and earlier. So this basically has no adverse effect. Even if a draft happened all the same people who would have been drafted before will be drafted now.
I like how you got downvoted for rehashing 16bit when all they did was repeat exactly the same thing me and the article headline said and still got upvotes.
You're required to sign up within 30 days of your 18th birthday. You should have (well your parents anyway) a social security card within the first year of your life, strange outliers aside.
It's still technically a crime knowingly not registering, with a $250k fine, even if it hasn't been prosecuted in decades.
It also bars you from federal government jobs, many federal programs, and grants. Until 2020, it also barred any federal financial aid for education, but that's changed now.
I don't even think he's over 69 I think he just wants to say the Draft is some impending doom we should be worried about, but at this point if a draft occurs it will probably be for something pretty important.
Again, there hasn't been a draft in 51 years, all of our current armed forces are volunteers and about a fifth of them are women. If you want to extend the draft that is fine but it sounded more like you were opposed to the draft entirely.
Kinda a nothing burger really. The military doesn't want conscripts unless there's an existential threat to the country.
So there's two scenarios:
Selective service continues to exist and is only used if there's an existential threat to the country
Selective service is eliminated and is re-instated only if there's an existential threat to the country
Option 2 is preferable since it eliminates the cost of a program that will likely never be used again. But it still doesn't eliminate the possibility of a draft since if the country were under an existential threat in the future, legislation can be passed to bring it back. So Option 2 isn't effectively different from Option 1, other than the cost savings.
As it is, selective service is basically just a political talking point, and a way to "own the libs" or whatever. The best way to argue against it is to make an argument around the cost of a program that doesn't really accomplish anything. But the libs take the bait and argue about not wanting to be drafted, which isn't wrong, but that makes the libs look weak in the eyes of many, and it allows Republicans get to make hay about their opposition being weak.
I mean if you wanna argue that that is the way it should work, I guess we could have that conversation.
(Way too many people I know won't keep themselves informed enough to vote on representatives, let alone understanding every individual bill well enough to vote on those.)
But if you're under the impression that that is how it currently works, I guess all I can really do is recommend you take a civics class or something cause that's wild lmao
The US is a representative democracy, not a direct democracy. You elect representatives to represent your interests. Or these days, you elect representatives to not represent the other people you don't like.
