Here we are, finally, on November 2. All our efforts on this blog site are done, for better or worse, depending on your point of view. I would like to thank the Spokesman-Review for this opportunity. I frequently write letters to the editor, and when they began their e-mail solicitations of reader opinions, I let them have it. I told them that I was disappointed that they seem to be following the leads of mainstream media, which, in my opinion, was inadequate to say the least. I told them I was disappointed that they weren’t reporting on the real stories. I thought that the main stream media, the S-R included, no longer served their function as not only the disseminators of information but a watchdog for those who hold power over us. However, the S-R did something I thought very progressive in creating this site, Searching For Democracy, and giving people like me an opportunity to share with others what I thought were the real stories. I am impressed that the S-R wanted to provide alternate sources of information to their online readers. For that, I thank you.
As to the rest, here we are. Personally, I have never been so emotionally involved in an election. I confess that I didn’t know how dangerous George Bush would be to this country. I knew that I didn’t like his father’s politics, and for that reason alone I knew that a vote for Bush in 2000 would mean a vote for something I couldn’t even relate to. Since then, of course, I have come to realize that I was witnessing the fall of democracy. To quote from E.L. Doctorow, “The greatest democratic republic in history was turning it’s back on the future, using its extraordinary power and standing not to advance the ideal of a concordance of civilizations but to endorse the kind of tribal combat that originated with the Neanderthals...who could imagine ensuring their survival by no other means than pre-emptive war.”
Now I know, through publications such as The Nation (to which I hadn’t previously subscribed) and e-mails (thank God for the internet!) sent out from MoveOnPAC.org, League of Conservation Voters, Defenders of Wildlife, Parklines and the like, that George Bush and his crew were gutting the Clean Air Act and replacing it with the erroneously titled “Clear Skies” initiative which would produce anything but; creating loopholes for SUV’s; wholesaling public lands to any moneyed special interest, and hundreds of other environmental crimes. For the last 4 years I’ve been watching as our rights eroded under the Patriot Act; their ‘No Child Left Behind’ put our kids even further down the priority list; cronyism and corruption became the norm in Washington D.C, and terrorism and national security became the smokescreen under which this Administration would perform all sorts of indecent acts against my fellow citizens. I watched as this Administration conducted business in secrecy, spending $6.5 billion of our dollars creating 14 million new classified documents. I watched as they started a war that was not only unconstitutional, but morally reprehensible. Our beautiful country became the laughingstock of ‘democracy’ as we claimed we were freeing an oppressed people from a tyrant, only to replace that tyrant with Bush’s own form of tyranny and torture and oppression.
As Joni Mitchell said, so long ago, that “You don’t know what you’ve got ‘til it’s gone,” I didn’t realize how much I loved my country until these last 4 years. Watching my country in the hands of someone who didn’t give a damn about democracy, freedom, our national natural treasures, or me and my fellow citizens who don’t make more than a billion dollars a year. I realized that I loved it, and desperately don’t want to lose it.
All human institutions are bound to fail eventually; bound to succumb to the human elements of fear and greed which have defined our existence until now. This administration seems to have a monopoly on those characteristics. Characteristics that I hope our race is to evolve out of. This administration doesn’t embody that spiritual progression. It, to me, embodies a regression toward a more primitive society in which Might equals Right, which is what this country has been fighting against for 228 years.
Please, if you haven’t already done so, vote. Vote as if your well being depended on it, because it does.

Here we are, finally, on November 2. All our efforts on this blog site are done, for better or worse, depending on your point of view. I would like to thank the Spokesman-Review for this opportunity. I frequently write letters to the editor, and when they began their e-mail solicitations of reader opinions, I let them have it. I told them that I was disappointed that they seem to be following the leads of mainstream media, which, in my opinion, was inadequate to say the least. I told them I was disappointed that they weren’t reporting on the real stories. I thought that the main stream media, the S-R included, no longer served their function as not only the disseminators of information but a watchdog for those who hold power over us. However, the S-R did something I thought very progressive in creating this site, Searching For Democracy, and giving people like me an opportunity to share with others what I thought were the real stories. I am impressed that the S-R wanted to provide alternate sources of information to their online readers. For that, I thank you.
As to the rest, here we are. Personally, I have never been so emotionally involved in an election. I confess that I didn’t know how dangerous George Bush would be to this country. I knew that I didn’t like his father’s politics, and for that reason alone I knew that a vote for Bush in 2000 would mean a vote for something I couldn’t even relate to. Since then, of course, I have come to realize that I was witnessing the fall of democracy. To quote from E.L. Doctorow, “The greatest democratic republic in history was turning it’s back on the future, using its extraordinary power and standing not to advance the ideal of a concordance of civilizations but to endorse the kind of tribal combat that originated with the Neanderthals...who could imagine ensuring their survival by no other means than pre-emptive war.”
Now I know, through publications such as The Nation (to which I hadn’t previously subscribed) and e-mails (thank God for the internet!) sent out from MoveOnPAC.org, League of Conservation Voters, Defenders of Wildlife, Parklines and the like, that George Bush and his crew were gutting the Clean Air Act and replacing it with the erroneously titled “Clear Skies” initiative which would produce anything but; creating loopholes for SUV’s; wholesaling public lands to any moneyed special interest, and hundreds of other environmental crimes. For the last 4 years I’ve been watching as our rights eroded under the Patriot Act; their ‘No Child Left Behind’ put our kids even further down the priority list; cronyism and corruption became the norm in Washington D.C, and terrorism and national security became the smokescreen under which this Administration would perform all sorts of indecent acts against my fellow citizens. I watched as this Administration conducted business in secrecy, spending $6.5 billion of our dollars creating 14 million new classified documents. I watched as they started a war that was not only unconstitutional, but morally reprehensible. Our beautiful country became the laughingstock of ‘democracy’ as we claimed we were freeing an oppressed people from a tyrant, only to replace that tyrant with Bush’s own form of tyranny and torture and oppression.
As Joni Mitchell said, so long ago, that “You don’t know what you’ve got ‘til it’s gone,” I didn’t realize how much I loved my country until these last 4 years. Watching my country in the hands of someone who didn’t give a damn about democracy, freedom, our national natural treasures, or me and my fellow citizens who don’t make more than a billion dollars a year, I realized that I loved it, and desperately don’t want to lose it.
All human institutions are bound to fail eventually; bound to succumb to the human elements of fear and greed which have defined our existence until now. This administration seems to have a monopoly on those characteristics. Characteristics that I hope our race is to evolve out of. This administration doesn’t embody that spiritual progression. It, to me, embodies a regression toward a more primitive society in which Might equals Right, which is what this country has been fighting against for 228 years.
Please, if you haven’t already done so, vote. Vote as if your well being depended on it, because it does.

The federal Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, appointed last year by the U.S. Departments of Agriculture and Health and Human Services, has rewritten national dietary guidelines for the American public in a manner that is "so vague as to be meaningless," a group of national nutrition experts is charging.

According to OMB Watch, a nonprofit government watchdog organization, one reason for the watering down of federal recommendations for the consumption of carbohydrates, sugars and fats appears to be that the committee is stacked with members who have strong ties to the food, drug and dietary supplement industries.

Full story and sources here.

The Non-Arguable Case Against the Bush Administration

Here are 100 FACTS that show how destructive this administration has been to our nation. Issues addressed are Iraq, of course, Terrorism, National Security, Cronyism and Corruption, the Economy, Education, Health Care, the Environment (a biggie for me), Rights and Liberties, Flip Flops, his Biography, and Secrecy.

Click here for the full list. Sources are linked.

The Non-Arguable Case Against the Bush Administration

Here are 100 FACTS that show how destructive this administration has been to our nation. Issues addressed are Irag, of course, Terrorism, National Security, Cronyism and Corruption, the Economy, Education, Health Care, the Environment (a biggie for me), Rights and Liberties, Flip Flops, his Biography, and Secrecy.

Click here for the full list. Sources are linked.

The Bush administration is pushing the theory that the 380 tons of explosives were missing from the Al Qaqaa storage facility before the March 2003 invasion of Iraq. Administration spokesman Dan Senor said on CNN that "there's a very high probability that those weapons weren't even there before the war."

For days, this theory has been in direct conflict with a Pentagon official, who told the Associate Press on Monday, "US-led coalition troops had searched Al Qaqaa in the immediate aftermath of the March 2003 invasion and confirmed that the explosives, which had been under IAEA seal since 1991, were intact."

Now, video shot in Iraq by a Minneapolis news team provides further proof that the administration's theory is bogus. After the invasion - on April 18, 2003 - the Minneapolis ABC news crew was stationed just south of the Al Qaqaa facility. That day, they drove 2 to 3 miles north with the 101st Airborne Division. There, "members of the 101st Airborne Division showed the 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS news crew bunker after bunker of material labeled 'explosives.'"4 Some of the boxes were marked "Al Qaqaa."5 One soldier told the crew: "we can stick [detonation cords] in those and make some good bombs."

Click here for sources and an opportunity to see the video.

The Bush administration is pushing the theory that the 380 tons of explosives were missing from the Al Qaqaa storage facility before the March 2003 invasion of Iraq. Administration spokesman Dan Senor said on CNN that "there's a very high probability that those weapons weren't even there before the war."

For days, this theory has been in direct conflict with a Pentagon official, who told the Associate Press on Monday, "US-led coalition troops had searched Al Qaqaa in the immediate aftermath of the March 2003 invasion and confirmed that the explosives, which had been under IAEA seal since 1991, were intact."

Now, video shot in Iraq by a Minneapolis news team provides further proof that the administration's theory is bogus. After the invasion - on April 18, 2003 - the Minneapolis ABC news crew was stationed just south of the Al Qaqaa facility.3 That day, they drove 2 to 3 miles north with the 101st Airborne Division. There, "members of the 101st Airborne Division showed the 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS news crew bunker after bunker of material labeled 'explosives.'"4 Some of the boxes were marked "Al Qaqaa."5 One soldier told the crew: "we can stick [detonation cords] in those and make some good bombs."

Click here for sources and an opportunity to see the video.

More than 230 leading scientists and economists from across the nation have asked the United States Forest Service to abandon its efforts to weaken the Clinton-era Roadless Area Conservation Rule, saying that proposed changes run counter to sound scientific and economic principles.

In a strongly-worded letter to Forest Service officials, the scientists -- including world-renowned chimpanzee expert Jane Goodall and Harvard biologist Edward O. Wilson -- warned that they "are especially troubled by" the current Forest Service leadership's "track record of ignoring the best available science in policy decisions affecting public land."

The full story.

George W. Bush has weakened protections for forest wildlife and proposed opening 58 million acres of our last wild National Forests to corporate lobbyists from timber, oil, and mining industries.
Click here to see a fun video.

A new study by the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) shows that supporters of President Bush hold wildly inaccurate views about the world. For example, "a large majority [72 percent] of Bush supporters believe that before the war Iraq had weapons of mass destruction." Most Bush supporters [57 percent] also believe that the recently released report by Charles Duelfer, the administration's hand-picked weapons inspector, concluded Iraq either had WMD or a major program for developing them. In fact, the report concluded "Saddam Hussein did not produce or possess any weapons of mass destruction for more than a decade before the U.S.-led invasion" and the U.N. inspection regime had "curbed his ability to build or develop weapons."

According to the study, 75 percent Bush supporters also believe "Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda." Most Bush supporters [55 percent] believe that was the conclusion of the 9/11 commission. In fact, the 9/11 commission concluded there was no "collaborative relationship" between al-Qaeda and Iraq.

Bush supporters also hold inaccurate views about world public opinion of the war in Iraq and a range of Bush's foreign policy positions.

Sources

A new study by the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) shows that supporters of President Bush hold wildly inaccurate views about the world. For example, "a large majority [72 percent] of Bush supporters believe that before the war Iraq had weapons of mass destruction." Most Bush supporters [57 percent] also believe that the recently released report by Charles Duelfer, the administration's hand-picked weapons inspector, concluded Iraq either had WMD or a major program for developing them. In fact, the report concluded "Saddam Hussein did not produce or possess any weapons of mass destruction for more than a decade before the U.S.-led invasion" and the U.N. inspection regime had
"curbed his ability to build or develop weapons."

According to the study, 75 percent Bush supporters also believe "Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda." Most Bush supporters
[55 percent] believe that was the conclusion of the 9/11 commission. In fact, the 9/11 commission concluded there was no "collaborative
relationship" between al-Qaeda and Iraq.

Bush supporters also hold inaccurate views about world public opinion of the war in Iraq and a range of Bush's foreign policy positions.

Sources

A new study by the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) shows that supporters of President Bush hold wildly inaccurate views about the world. For example, "a large majority [72 percent] of Bush supporters believe that before the war Iraq had weapons of mass destruction." Most Bush supporters [57 percent] also believe that the recently released report by Charles Duelfer, the administration's hand-picked
weapons inspector, concluded Iraq either had WMD or a major program for developing them. In fact, the report concluded "Saddam Hussein did not produce or possess any weapons of mass destruction for more than a decade before the U.S.-led invasion" and the U.N. inspection regime had
"curbed his ability to build or develop weapons."

According to the study, 75 percent Bush supporters also believe "Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda." Most Bush supporters
[55 percent] believe that was the conclusion of the 9/11 commission. In fact, the 9/11 commission concluded there was no "collaborative
relationship" between al-Qaeda and Iraq.

Bush supporters also hold inaccurate views about world public opinion of the war in Iraq and a range of Bush's foreign policy positions.

Sources

A new study by the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) shows that supporters of President Bush hold wildly inaccurate views about
the world. For example, "a large majority [72 percent] of Bush supporters believe that before the war Iraq had weapons of mass destruction." Most Bush supporters [57 percent] also believe that the recently released report by Charles Duelfer, the administration's hand-picked
weapons inspector, concluded Iraq either had WMD or a major program for developing them. In fact, the report concluded "Saddam Hussein did not
produce or possess any weapons of mass destruction for more than a decade before the U.S.-led invasion" and the U.N. inspection regime had
"curbed his ability to build or develop weapons."

According to the study, 75 percent Bush supporters also believe "Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda." Most Bush supporters
[55 percent] believe that was the conclusion of the 9/11 commission. In fact, the 9/11 commission concluded there was no "collaborative
relationship" between al-Qaeda and Iraq.

Bush supporters also hold inaccurate views about world public opinion of the war in Iraq and a range of Bush's foreign policy positions.

Sources

"With the price of oil above $50 a barrel, with political instability in the Middle East on the rise, and with little slack in the world oil economy, we need a new energy strategy," says Lester R. Brown, president of the Earth Policy Institute, a Washington, DC-based research institute. "Fortunately, the outline of a new strategy is emerging with two new technologies.

Read the full story here.

BUSH MISLEADS ON FLU VACCINE

President Bush has tried to avoid any responsibility for the flu vaccine shortage by making misleading statements. During the presidential debate last Wednesday, President Bush said the problem was that "we relied upon a company out of England." That isn't true. Chiron Corp., the company whose vaccine plant was contaminated, is a California company -
subject to regulation by the U.S. government - that operates a factory in England.

During the debate, President Bush also said, "we took the right action and didn't allow contaminated medicine into our country." That isn't true either. It was the British authorities who, after inspecting the plant, revoked the factory's license on October 5th.

In June 2003, the United States Food and Drug Administration inspected the Chiron plant. Initially, the FDA found that the plant was
contaminated with bacteria but later announced, "the problems were corrected to their satisfaction," and allowed the plant to continue to operate.

Sources

As reported in BushGreenwatch in late May, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), released a new plan for management of the Northwest's wild salmon--one that overturned 15 years of established fish recovery practice.

The full story.

Late last May, Bush Greenwatch warned that the Bush Administration was preparing the way to cripple the Endangered Species Act by counting hatchery fish as well as wild when considering Pacific salmon for listing under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

At Thursday's debate President Bush said most of his tax cuts "went to low- and middle-income Americans." That statement is flatly false.

An analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that, in 2004, the top 20 percent of earners received 69.8% of the tax cuts
enacted by President Bush. While the middle 20 percent of earners received an average tax cut of $647, the top 20 percent received an average
tax cut of $5,055. As a result, those in the middle class are paying a greater share of the federal taxes today than they were four years
ago.

Click here for sources.

As the campaign to unseat the worst anti-environment president in history heats up, LCV endorses Sen. John Kerry. His extraordinary lifetime LCV rating, record of accomplishment, and commitment to our issues makes him the clear choice for environmentalists.

If the environment is important to you, check this out.

At the last debate President Bush claimed that, contrary to Sen. John Kerry's assertion, he never said he was "not that concerned" about Osama Bin Laden. Bush chastised Kerry saying, "Gosh, I don't think I ever said I'm not worried about Osama bin Laden. That's kind of one of those exaggerations." Bush was completely wrong.

At March 13, 2002 press conference, Bush said "So I don't know where he [Osama Bin Laden] is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on
him...I truly am not that concerned about him." Watch the video of Bush's remarks.

This is NOT what I want 4 more years of...

BUSH MISLEADS ON FISCAL RESPONSIBILITIES

In a speech Monday, President Bush advocated fiscal responsibility in government, saying, "we need to be wise about how we spend your money." He is now poised, however, to sign into law a massive, $137-billion tax giveaway to corporate and special interests.

The tax bill was originally created to fix a $50-billion export subsidy that had triggered retaliatory tariffs by our trading partners. Instead of simply repealing the subsidy, Congress replaced it with a $77-billion giveaway to corporations, many of which never qualified for the original subsidy. It also provides $43 billion in tax breaks for companies operating overseas, including a giant break to top corporations like Hewlett-Packard and Eli Lilly that allows them "to bring hundreds of billions of dollars in untaxed foreign profits back into the United States at about one-seventh of the normal tax rate."

Lawmakers larded down the bill with pork for their favored special interests. The bill included million-dollar tax cuts for fishing tackle box
manufacturers, Chinese ceiling fan importers, horse and dog track gamblers and Native Alaskan whaling captains.

Click here for sources.

In 2000, then-candidate George Bush told USA Today, "I will ensure that the federal government meets it responsibilities by devoting $5 billion to eliminate the backlog in maintenance and improvements at our national parks."

But under Norton, budgeting gimmicks are disguising severe shortages of funds and staff in the parks. In Everglades National Park (FL), of 210 permanent positions, 48 are vacant. At Gettysburg National Military Park (PA), requests by 25 percent of school groups are rejected for lack of funds.

Late last month the Coalition of Concerned National Park Service Retirees -- a group that includes five former directors of the National Park Service and 95 former Park superintendents or assistant superintendents -- issued a report describing a national park system plagued by disrepair, deteriorating facilities, declining budgets, diminished staffing levels, and low morale.

To read the full article, and to download a copy of the report, A Call To Action: Saving Our National Park System, go here.

Sewage that has not been properly treated would be routinely released into American waterways on rainy or snowy days, under an administration proposal that may soon become final.

Under the Clean Water Act, it is illegal to mix largely untreated sewage with fully treated wastewater (a process known as "blending") prior to releasing it -- except in dire emergencies, such as hurricanes, said Nancy Stoner, director of the Clean Water Project for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).

"Current law allows this only when there are no feasible alternatives," she told BushGreenwatch. "This proposal would make it routine, and that's unacceptable."

Typically, sewage goes through three types of treatment before it is discharged into the water system. First, solids are removed. Then, the sewage is treated for the removal of viruses, parasites and nutrient pollution, which can reduce the oxygen level in water. Last, the sewage is disinfected to remove bacteria. In "blending," the second phase of treatment is skipped, which makes the third phase far less effective as well, said Stoner.

NRDC tests found a 1,000-times greater likelihood that people would become ill with gastrointestinal problems from swimming near blended sewage than they would from swimming near fully treated sewage releases, said Stoner.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposal would allow "blending" practices anytime it rained, as well as during snow melts. According to Clean Water Action, the proposal is the administration's answer to "insufficient maintenance of aging sewer systems." The administration has also proposed substantial budget cuts to a fund that provides assistance to states to maintain aging sewer systems.

The Clean Water Action website emphasizes that releasing blended sewage into the nation's waterways can have serious public health consequences. Sewage spillovers resulting from heavy rainfall preceded "more than half of U.S. waterborne disease outbreaks in the past 50 years," the website notes. "The Centers for Disease Control estimates 7.1 million annual cases of mild to moderate and 560,000 cases of moderate to severe infectious waterborne diseases."

"Sewage in our waterways closes beaches, kills fish, shuts down shellfish beds, and causes gastrointestinal and respiratory illnesses," the website notes. "In 2000 alone, sewage contamination caused or contributed to over 2,000 beach closings and advisories."

More than 100,000 comments have been submitted to the EPA in opposition to its proposal. While the public comment period is now closed, the agency has not yet published its final rule.

Clean Water Action website

Mandatory draft for boys and girls (ages 18-26) starting June 15, 2005, is something that everyone should know about.

This literally effects everyone since we all have or know children that will have to go if this bill passes.

There is pending legislation in the house and senate (companion bills: S89 and HR 163) which will time the program's initiation so the draft can begin as early as spring, 2005, just after the 2004 presidential election. The administration is quietly trying to get these bills passed now, while the public's attention is on the elections, so our action on this is needed immediately. Details and links follow.

This plan, among other things, eliminates higher education as a shelter and includes women in the draft. Also, crossing into Canada has already been made very difficult.

To read this legislation, go to this site. and type in HR 163 in the bill number search section.It is less than two pages long.

If this bill passes, it will include all men and ALL WOMEN from ages 18 - 26 in a draft for military action. In addition, college will no longer be an option for avoiding the draft and they will be signing an agreement with Canada which will no longer permit anyone attempting to dodge the draft to stay within it's borders. This bill also includes the extention of military service for all those that are currently active. If you go to the select service web site and read their 2004 FYI Goals you will see that the reasoning for this is to increase the size of the military in case of terrorism. This is a critical piece of legislation, this will effect our undergradates, our children and our grandchildren.

I'm wondering why our representatives aren't telling us about these bills and why aren't newspapers and other media covering this important story? These active bills currently sit in the committee on armed services.

The draft $28 million has been added to the 2004 selective service system budget to prepare for a military draft that could start as early as June 15, 2005. Selective service must report to Bush on March 31, 2005 that the system, which has lain dormant for decades, is ready for activation.

Click here to view the Selective Service System annual performance plan, fiscal year 2004.

The pentagon has quietly begun a public campaign to fill all 10,350 draft board positions and 11,070 appeals board slots nationwide. Though this is an unpopular election year topic, military experts and influential members of congress are suggesting that if Rumsfeld's prediction of a "long, hard slog" in Iraq and Afghanistan (and permanent state of war on terrorism) proves accurate, the U.S. may have no choice but to draft.

Dodging the draft will be more difficult than those from the Vietnam era. College and Canada will not be options. In December, 2001, Canada and the U.S. signed a "smart border declaration," which could be used to keep would-be draft dodgers in. Signed by Canada's minister of foreign affairs, John Manley, and U.S. Homeland Security director, Tom Ridge, the declaration involves a 30 point plan which implements, among other things, a "pre-clearance agreement" of people entering and departing each country. Reforms aimed at making the draft more equitable along gender and class lines also eliminates higher education as a shelter.

Underclassmen would only be able to postpone service until the end of their current semester. Seniors would have until the end of the academic year.

We must voice our concerns and create the world we want to live in for our children and grandchildren.

Mandatory draft for boys and girls (ages 18-26) starting June 15, 2005, is something that everyone should know about.

This literally effects everyone since we all have or know children that will have to go if this bill passes.

There is pending legislation in the house and senate (companion bills: S89 and HR 163) which will time the program's initiation so the draft can begin as early as spring, 2005, just after the 2004 presidential election. The administration is quietly trying to get these bills passed now, while the public's attention is on the elections, so our action on this is needed immediately. Details and links follow.

This plan, among other things, eliminates higher education as a shelter and includes women in the draft. Also, crossing into Canada has already been made very difficult.

Read this legislation HR 163. It is less than two pages long.

If this bill passes, it will include all men and ALL WOMEN from ages 18 - 26 in a draft for military action. In addition, college will no longer be an option for avoiding the draft and they will be signing an agreement with Canada which will no longer permit anyone attempting to dodge the draft to stay within it's borders. This bill also includes the extention of military service for all those that are currently active. If you go to the select service web site and read their 2004 FYI Goals you will see that the reasoning for this is to increase the size of the military in case of terrorism. This is a critical piece of legislation, this will effect our undergradates, our children and our grandchildren.

I'm wondering why our representatives aren't telling us about these bills and why aren't newspapers and other media covering this important story? These active bills currently sit in the committee on armed services.

The draft $28 million has been added to the 2004 selective service system budget to prepare for a military draft that could start as early as June 15, 2005. Selective service must report to Bush on March 31, 2005 that the system, which has lain dormant for decades, is ready for activation.

Click here to view the Selective Service System annual performance plan, fiscal year 2004.

The pentagon has quietly begun a public campaign to fill all 10,350 draft board positions and 11,070 appeals board slots nationwide. Though this is an unpopular election year topic, military experts and influential members of congress are suggesting that if Rumsfeld's prediction of a "long, hard slog" in Iraq and Afghanistan (and permanent state of war on terrorism) proves accurate, the U.S. may have no choice but to draft.

Dodging the draft will be more difficult than those from the Vietnam era. College and Canada will not be options. In December, 2001, Canada and the U.S. signed a "smart border declaration," which could be used to keep would-be draft dodgers in. Signed by Canada's minister of foreign affairs, John Manley, and U.S. Homeland Security director, Tom Ridge, the declaration involves a 30 point plan which implements, among other things, a "pre-clearance agreement" of people entering and departing each country. Reforms aimed at making the draft more equitable along gender and class lines also eliminates higher education as a shelter.

Underclassmen would only be able to postpone service until the end of their current semester. Seniors would have until the end of the academic year.

We must voice our concerns and create the world we want to live in for our children and grandchildren.

At the debate, President Bush said that we could not hope to defeat terrorists if we have a leader who sends mixed signals. Bush said, "you cannot lead if you send mixed messages. Mixed messages send the wrong signals to our troops. Mixed messages send the wrong signals to our allies." But, throughout his presidency, Bush has sent mixed messages on fundamental terrorism-related issues.

For example, in September 2001 Bush said that he was determined to capture Osama bin Laden "dead or alive." Six months later Bush said, "I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him... I truly am not that concerned about him."

In April of this year, Bush said that we could win the war on terrorism. Then, on August 30, he said "I don't think you can win [the war on terror]." The next day, he said "Make no mistake about it, we are winning and we will win [the war on terror]."

Click here for sources.