What did the Selective Service Act accomplish it required Allies to buy supplies with cash

Registration is the Law

A man’s only duty right now under the Military Selective Service Act is to register at age 18 and then to let Selective Service know within 10 days of any changes in the information he provided on his registration form until he turns 26 years old.

Fairness and Equity

By registering all eligible men, Selective Service ensures a fair and equitable draft, if ever required. Exemptions and deferments apply only in the event of a draft.

Insurance for the Nation

By registering, a man’s participation helps provide a hedge against unforeseen threats. The Selective Service System is a relatively low-cost insurance policy for our nation.

Civic Duty

It’s your responsibility to ensure that young men 18 through 25 understand the law so they can make an informed decision about registration compliance. Currently, more than 90 percent of eligible young men are registered. It’s a civic duty of every young man to comply with the law.

Protect Eligibility for Future Benefits

By registering, a young man stays eligible for jobs, college loans and grants, job training, driver’s license in most states, and U.S. citizenship for immigrant men.

Benefits and Repercussions Associated with Registration

Men who fail to register with Selective Service may be ineligible for opportunities that may be important to their future. View more information on the benefits linked to registration, as well as what the penalties are for failing to register with the Selective Service System.

 Benefits and Penalties

The Selective Service System and Draft
Registration: Issues for Congress
Updated August 18, 2021
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
R44452

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

Summary
The Military Selective Service Act (MSSA), first enacted as the Selective Service Act of 1948,
provides the statutory authority for the federal government to maintain a 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.
The annual budget for the agency is about $26 million. One of the SSS’s main functions is to
maintain a database of registrants in case of a draft. The agency stores approximately 80 million
records in order to verify registration status and eligibility for certain benefits that require
certification of registration for eligibility. The SSS has a staff of about 124 full-time employees,
complemented by a corps of volunteers and military reservists.
The MSSA requires most males between the ages of 18 and 26 who are citizens or residents of the
United States to register with Selective Service. Women in the United States have never been
required to register for the draft. Men who fail to register may be subject to criminal penalties,
loss of eligibility for certain federal or state employment opportunities and education benefits,
and denial of security clearances. Documented or undocumented immigrants who fail to register
may not be able to obtain United States citizenship. While individuals may still register at U.S.
post offices, the SSS attributes high compliance rates to a system of automatic electronic
registration supported by state legislation and interagency cooperation.
The MSSA does not currently authorize the use of a draft for induction into the Armed Forces.
When the draft has been implemented, it has met some public resistance. Such resistance to the
draft drives much of the opposition toward maintaining the SSS and the registration requirement.
Even some who are not opposed to the government’s use of conscription in a time of national
need are opposed to maintaining the current SSS agency infrastructure. They argue that a stand-
alone agency is unnecessary and expensive and that there are a number of alternatives that could
more effectively and efficiently enable the country to reestablish conscription, if necessary.
Others counter that, at the cost of about $26 million annually, maintaining the SSS is a relatively
inexpensive insurance policy should the draft need to be quickly reinstated. They also argue that
maintaining the SSS sends a signal to potential adversaries that the United States is willing to
draw on its full national resources for armed conflict if necessary.
Some are concerned that the registration requirements are inequitable, arguing that it is unfair to
men that women can voluntarily serve in all military occupations but are exempt from the
registration requirement and the prospect of being drafted. In addition, some have raised concerns
about the statutory penalties for failing to register and whether these penalties are more likely to
be levied on economically or educationally disadvantaged groups. Some contend that Congress
should amend MSSA and associated statute to remove penalties for failing to register. Others
argue that weakening or removing penalties would cause registration compliance rates to fall to
unacceptably low levels. In response to these issues, Congress established a National Commission
on Military, National, and Public Service to provide research support and recommendations for
the future of the SSS. The commission released its final report in March 2020 and recommended
maintaining the SSS and mandatory registration as a draft contingency mechanism. The
commission also recommended expanding mandatory registration for women.
Congressional Research Service

link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 6 link to page 7 link to page 8 link to page 11 link to page 12 link to page 12 link to page 14 link to page 16 link to page 18 link to page 20 link to page 22 link to page 22 link to page 25 link to page 26 link to page 30 link to page 31 link to page 32 link to page 32 link to page 33 link to page 34 link to page 35 link to page 36 link to page 36 link to page 37 link to page 38 link to page 41 link to page 43 link to page 28 link to page 17 link to page 25 link to page 32 link to page 44 The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

Contents
Overview ......................................................................................................................................... 1
Background ..................................................................................................................................... 1
1863 Enrollment Act and Civil War Conscription .................................................................... 2
Selective Service Act of 1917 and World War I Conscription .................................................. 3
The Selective Training and Service Act and World War II ....................................................... 4
Consideration of Universal Compulsory Service ................................................................ 7
Post-World War II, the Selective Service Act of 1948 .............................................................. 8
Korean War and the Universal Military Training and Service Act of 1951 .............................. 8
The Vietnam War and Proposals for Draft Reform ................................................................. 10
The Gates Commission ..................................................................................................... 12
All-Volunteer Force (AVF) and a Standby SSS ...................................................................... 14
New Penalties for Registration Noncompliance ..................................................................... 16
Other Legislative Action since 1980 ....................................................................................... 18
National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service ........................................... 18
Selective Service Registration ....................................................................................................... 21
Processes for Registration ....................................................................................................... 22
Selective Service System Agency Overview ................................................................................. 26
Workforce and Organization ................................................................................................... 27
Funding ................................................................................................................................... 28
Data-Sharing and Data Management ...................................................................................... 28
What are Some Options for the Future of the Selective Service System? ..................................... 29
Arguments For and Against Repeal of MSSA ........................................................................ 30
Other Legislative Options and Considerations ........................................................................ 31
Repealing the Peacetime Registration Requirement ......................................................... 32
Transferring SSS Functions to an Existing Federal Agency ............................................. 32
Amending or Repealing the Penalties for Failing to Register........................................... 33
Changing Registration Requirements to Include Women ................................................. 34
Enhanced SSS Data Collection for the Acquisition of Critical Skills ............................... 37
Strengthening Ability to Respond to a National Mobilization .......................................... 39

Figures
Figure 1. Registrations by Method of Registration ....................................................................... 24

Tables
Table 1. Draft Inductees and Total Participants in Major Conflicts .............................................. 13
Table 2. Who Is Required to Register for the Selective Service? .................................................. 21
Table 3. Selective Service Agency Budget .................................................................................... 28

Table A-1. Acronyms ..................................................................................................................... 40

Congressional Research Service

link to page 44 link to page 44 The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

Appendixes
Appendix. Acronyms ..................................................................................................................... 40

Contacts
Author Information ........................................................................................................................ 40

Congressional Research Service

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

Overview
The United States has not used conscription to fill manpower requirements for over four decades;
however, the Selective Service System and the requirement for young men to register for the draft
remain today. Men who fail to register are subject to penalties in the form of lost benefits and
criminal action. Some have questioned the need to maintain this agency and the registration
requirements. Others have questioned whether the current requirements for registration are fair
and equitable.
This report provides Congress with information about how the Military Selective Service Act
(MSSA), the Selective Service System (SSS), and associated requirements for registration have
evolved over time. It explains why the United States developed the SSS, what the system looks
like today, how constituents are affected by the MSSA requirements, and what the options and
considerations may be for the future of the Selective Service. The first section of the report
provides background and history on the Military Selective Service Act, the Selective Service
System, and the implementation of the draft in the United States. The second section discusses
statutory registration requirements, processes for registering, and penalties for failing to register.
The third section discusses the current organization, roles, and resourcing of the Selective Service
System. The final section discusses policy options and consideration for Congress for the future
of the MSSA and the Selective Service System.
This report does not discuss the state of the all-volunteer force or whether it is adequate to meet
the nation’s current or future manpower needs. In addition, it does not provide an analysis of
other options for military manpower resourcing such as universal military service or universal
military training. Finally, this report does not evaluate whether the SSS, as currently structured, is
adequately resourced and organized to perform its statutory mission. These questions and others
were reviewed by the National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service established
by the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2017 (P.L. 114-328). The
commission released its final report on March 26, 2020 and a brief discussion of its findings with
relation to the SSS are included in this report.
Background
The United States has used federal conscription at various times since the Civil War era, primarily
in times of war, but also during peacetime in the aftermath of World War II. When first adopted in
1863, national conscription was a marked departure from the traditional military policy of the
United States, which from the founding era had relied on a small volunteer force that could be
augmented by state militias in times of conflict. Conscription was used as a mechanism to provide
military manpower during times of need until the adoption of the all-volunteer force (AVF) in
1973. At this time, authority to induct new draftees under the Military Selective Service Act
ceased.1 Nevertheless, a standby draft mechanism still exists to furnish manpower above and
beyond that provided by the active and reserve components of the Armed Forces in the case of a
major military contingency. If the federal government were to reinstate the draft, draftees would
likely be required to fill all authorized positions to include casualty replacements, billets in
understrength units, and new military units activated to expand the wartime force.

1 P.L. 92-129.
Congressional Research Service

1

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

1863 Enrollment Act and Civil War Conscription
During the Civil War, due to high demand for military manpower, weaknesses in the system for
calling up state militia units, and an insufficient number of volunteers for active federal service,
President Abraham Lincoln signed the 1863 Enrollment Act.2 This marked the first instance of the
federal government calling individuals into compulsory federal service through conscription.3 All
male citizens between the ages of 20 and 45 who were capable of bearing arms were liable to be
drafted. The law allowed exemptions for dependency and employment in official positions. The
Enrollment Act also established a national Provost Marshal Bureau, led by a provost marshal
general and was responsible for enforcing the draft.4 Under the act, the President had authority to
establish enrollment districts and to appoint a provost marshal to each district to serve under the
direction of the Secretary of War in a separate bureau under the War Department. The provost
marshal general was responsible for establishing a district board for processing enrollments and
was given authority under the law to make rules and regulations for the operation of the boards
and to arrest draft dodgers and deserters. Government agents went door-to-door to enroll
individuals, followed by a lottery in each congressional district based on district quotas.5
Some observers criticized the Enrollment Act as favoring the wealthiest citizens, because it
allowed for either the purchase of a substitute who would serve in the draftee’s place or payment
by the draftee of a fee up to $300.6 In addition, volunteers were offered bounties by both the
federal government and some local communities. Under this system, fraud and desertions were
common.7 Enforcement of the draft also incited rioting and violence in many cities across the
United States, most famously in New York City. On July 13, 1863, the intended date of the
second draft drawing in New York City, an angry mob attacked the assistant Ninth District
provost marshal’s office, smashing the lottery selection wheel and setting the building on fire.8
Several days of rioting and violence ensued until federal troops were called in to restore order.
The draft call was suspended in New York City during the rioting and was not resumed until
August 19, 1863.

2 12 Stat. 731. This act is also known as the Civil War Military Draft Act or the National Conscription Law.
3 The federal government had called state militias into compulsory service. Conscription differs from militia activations
in that the federal government calls individuals directly into federal service without going through the states. The
Confederacy also enacted draft legislation and implemented conscription alongside volunteer service.
4 The provost marshal general was an Army appointment first used in the American Revolutionary War, and thereafter,
mainly during periods of war. Currently, the provost marshal general serves in a law enforcement-type role for the U.S.
Army. See https://www.army.mil/opmg.
5 Quotas were based on the number of eligible men, not the total population, and also took into account the number of
men already serving in the district. All registered men had their names entered into their local district lottery and were
required to report in the order that their names were drawn.
6 “That any person drafted and notified to appear as aforesaid, may [ ... ] furnish an acceptable substitute to take his
place in the draft, or he may pay [ ... ] such sum, not exceeding three hundred dollars, as the Secretary may determine
for the procuration of such substitute,” 37th Cong. Sess.3, 12 Stat. 731, March 3, 1863.
7 Some men would volunteer and collect a bounty in one locality, then desert their unit and reenlist in a new district to
collect another bounty. Lt. General Lewis B. Hershey, Director Selective Service System, Outline of Historical
Background of Selective Service and Chronology, 1965 Edition, p. 6.
8 Rioting was largely led by the white working class, who could not afford exemptions under the law. Racial tensions
also contributed, as most black workers were not considered citizens and thus not eligible for the draft. White laborers
were also concerned about job competition from freed slaves following the January 1863 Emancipation Proclamation.
Iver Bernstein, The New York City Draft Riots; Significance for American Society and Politics in the Age of the Civil
War (NY: Oxford University Press, 1990), pp. 9-10.
Congressional Research Service

2

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

The total number of men that served in the Union forces during the course of the war was
2,690,401. The number drafted was 255,373. Of the total draftees, 86,724 avoided military
service by the payment of commutation, and 117,986 furnished substitutes.9 Volunteerism during
this war was likely driven in part by the bounty system.
Selective Service Act of 1917 and World War I Conscription
After the Civil War, the federal government did not use conscription again until World War I
(WWI). By then a new decentralized concept for a draft system termed “Selective Service” had
been developed that would apportion requirements for manpower to the states and through the
states to individual counties.10 By 1915, Europe was in all-out war; the United States had a small
volunteer Army of approximately 100,000 men. On April 2, 1917, President Woodrow Wilson
asked Congress for a declaration of war, and on May 18, 1917, he signed an act commonly
known as the Selective Service Act of 1917 into law.11 This new law allowed the President to
draft the National Guard into federal service (rather than calling the militia into federal service)
and made all male citizens between the ages of 21 and 31 liable for the draft.12 The first national
registration was held on June 5, 1917 at precinct polling locations.13
On July 15, 1917, Congress enacted a provision that all conscripted persons would be released
from compulsory service within four months of a presidential proclamation of peace.14 In 1918,
Congress extended the eligible draft age to include all males between the ages of 18 and 45.
World War I was the first instance of conscription of United States citizens for overseas service.
A key aspect of the Selective Service Act of 1917 was that it allowed the federal government to
select individuals from a pool of registrants for federal service. Unlike the Civil War, a shortage
of volunteers was not the primary concern in enacting this legislation. The selective aspects of the
WWI draft law were driven by concerns that indiscriminate volunteerism could adversely affect
the domestic economy and industrial base. In support of the selective service law, Senator
William M. Calder of New York said, “under a volunteer system, there is no way of preventing
men from leaving industries and crippling resources that are just as important as the army
itself.”15 Approximately 100,000 deferments were provided to otherwise qualified men so that
they might serve in the shipbuilding industry.16
In contrast to the Civil War draft, the Selective Service Act of 1917 did not allow for the
furnishing of substitutes or bounties for enlistment. It also provided for decentralized
administration through local and district draft boards that were responsible for registering and

9 E.H. Crowder, Second Report of the Provost Marshal General to the Secretary of War On the Operations of the
Selective Service System to December 20, 1918, GPO, Washington, DC, 1919, p. 376.
10 Bernard D. Rostker, I Want You! The Evolution of the All-Volunteer Force, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA,
2006.
11 P.L. 65-12, 40 Stat.76. Also known as the Selective Draft Act.
12 The act exempted federal and state officials and ministers and theological students. Members of religious sects
forbidding participation in war were to be held for noncombatant service only.
13 Lt. General Lewis B. Hershey, Director Selective Service System, Outline of Historical Background of Selective
Service and Chronology, 1965 Edition, p. 7.
14 P.L. 65-23, June 15, 1917.
15 John L. Rafuse, “United States’ Experience with Volunteer and Conscript Forces,” in Studies Prepared for the
President’s Commission on an All-Volunteer Armed Force, vol. 2. District of Columbia: U.S. GPO, 1970, p. III-1-23.
16 Lt. General Lewis B. Hershey, Director Selective Service System, Outline of Historical Background of Selective
Service and Chronology, 1965 Edition, p. 8.
Congressional Research Service

3

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

classifying men, and calling registrants into service.17 The law specified that the President would
appoint boards consisting of civilian members “not connected with the Military Establishment.”
Over 4,600 such boards were established to hear and decide on claims for exemptions.18 The
provost marshal general, at the time Major General Enoch Crowder, oversaw the operation of
these boards.
The first draft lottery was held on July 20, 1917.19 Out of the 24.2 million that registered for the
draft in WWI, 2.8 million were eventually inducted. While the law did not prohibit volunteers, the
implementation of the selective service system alongside a volunteer system became too complex
and the Army discontinued accepting volunteer enlistees by December 15, 1917.20 By 1919, at the
end of the war, the provost marshal general was relieved from his duties, all registration activities
were terminated, and all local and district boards were closed. In 1936, the Secretaries of War and
the Navy created the Joint Army-Navy Selective Service Committee to manage emergency
mobilization planning.21 The committee was headed by Army Major Lewis B. Hershey.
Between WWI and WWII, the Armed Forces shrank in numbers due to both treaty commitments
and public attitudes toward a large standing force. In the interwar period, two opposing
movements emerged. Some were in support of legislative provisions that would empower the
President to conscript men for military service upon a declaration of war, and some called for a
universal draft, universal military training, or broader authorities to conscript civilian labor in
times of both war and peace.22 Others proposed provisions that would require a national
referendum on any future use of conscription, or would forbid conscripts from serving outside the
territorial borders of the United States.
The Selective Training and Service Act and World War II
In the interwar period, the congressionally-mandated Joint Army and Navy Selective Service
Committee (JANSSC) continued studying and planning for future contingencies, and maintained
draft legislation and regulations to support a potential return of the draft.23 In 1940, Europe was
already at war, and despite the neutrality of the United States at the time, some in Congress
argued that the United States could not continue with a peacetime force while other nations were
mobilizing on a massive scale.24 In June 1940, President Franklin D. Roosevelt announced that he
would recommend a program of universal compulsory government service for American youth

17 Classifications included “eligible and liable for military service,” temporary deferments and exemptions, and full
exemptions based on individual circumstances.
18 B.W. Patch, “Conscription in the United States,” in Editorial Research Reports 1940, vol. II, Washington, DC, CQ
Press, 1940.
19 Draft numbers were placed in capsules and drawn from a large fishbowl to establish the order for reporting for
induction. Those whose draft number was called first were the first to be required to report for induction.
20 The Navy followed and Marine Corps stopped accepting volunteer enlistments after August 8, 1918. B.W. Patch,
“Conscription in the United States,” in Editorial Research Reports 1940, vol. II (CQ Press, 1940).
21 Bernard D. Rostker, I Want You! The Evolution of the All-Volunteer Force, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA,
2006.
22 B.W. Patch, “Conscription in the United States,” in Editorial Research Reports 1940, vol. II, Washington, DC, CQ
Press, 1940.
23 Lt. General Lewis B. Hershey, Director Selective Service System, Outline of Historical Background of Selective
Service and Chronology, 1965 Edition, p. 8.
24 John L. Rafuse, “United States’ Experience with Volunteer and Conscript Forces,” in Studies Prepared for the
President’s Commission on an All-Volunteer Armed Force, vol. 2. District of Columbia: U.S. GPO, 1970.
Congressional Research Service

4

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

(men and women).25 A few days later a conscription bill, modeled on the Selective Service Act of
1917, was sponsored by Senator Edward Burke and Representative James Wadsworth in their
respective chambers. The bill garnered support by senior Army leaders, who expressed concerns
about the ability to recruit a sufficient number of volunteers necessary to fight a major war.26
Some in Congress opposed to the bill argued the following:
Regimentation of American life as provided for by the Burke-Wadsworth bill in peacetime
is abhorrent to the ideals of patriotic Americans and is utterly repugnant to American
democracy and American traditions ... no proof or evidence was offered to indicate that the
personnel needs of the Army and Navy cannot be obtained on a voluntary basis.27
The conscription bill became the Selective Training and Service Act, and was signed into law on
September 16, 1940, by Franklin D. Roosevelt.28 The act was the first instance of peacetime
conscription in the United States and required men between aged 21 through 35 to register with
local draft boards. The law required a 12-month training period for those inducted, at which time
the inductees would be transferred to a reserve component of the Armed Forces for 10 years.
Criminal penalties for failing to comply with registration or other duties under this act included
“imprisonment of not more than five years or a fine of not more than $10,000, or by both such
fine and imprisonment.”29
The act also gave the President the authority to establish a Selective Service System, and to
appoint a Director of the Selective Service with oversight of local civilian boards. Because the
image of civilian leadership was deemed important during a time of peace, in 1940 the President
initially appointed Dr. Clarence Dykstra as Director of the Selective Service while also retaining
his position as president of the University of Wisconsin.30 Due to poor health Dykstra never took
up his position as Director of Selective Service. In July 1941, the JANSSC became the new
Selective Service headquarters and Colonel Lewis B. Hershey was appointed as the Director, a
position he held until 1970, departing with the rank of Lieutenant General.31
In terms of the implementation of the Selective Service System, there was an emphasis on
establishing an equitable lottery system administered by decentralized local draft boards as was
deemed a successful approach during WWI:
The Selective Training and Service Act of 1940 is based on the principle that the obligation
and privileges of military training and service should be shared generally in accordance
with a fair and just system of compulsory military training and service.... The public
expected that the lottery under the new law would be conducted as the lottery of 1917-1918

25 B.W. Patch, “Revision of the Draft System,” in Editorial Research Reports 1941, vol. I, Washington, DC, CQ Press,
1941.
26 In testimony, General Marshall, Army Chief of Staff, stated that he was in favor of a selective-training bill, and in
media interviews stated his concerns that expansion of the Army beyond 375,000 could not be achieved through
voluntary enlistment alone. Patch, B.W., “Conscription in the United States," Editorial Research Reports 1940, vol. II,
(Washington, DC, CQ Press, 1940.
27 B.W. Patch, “Conscription in the United States,” Editorial Research Reports 1940, vol. II, Washington, DC, CQ
Press, 1940.
28 P.L. 76-784, 54 Stat. 885. This was also known as the Burke-Wadsworth Act.
29 P.L. 76-784, Section 11.
30 John Costa, The History and Operation of the Selective Service System: 1917-1966, Legislative Research Service,
December 12, 1969.
31 Bernard D. Rostker, I Want You! The Evolution of the All-Volunteer Force, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA,
2006.
Congressional Research Service

5

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

was conducted, and those charged with the administration of the Selective Service felt
likewise.32
The 6,442 district boards assigned a number to each registrant in their district.33 On October 29,
1940, the first draft lottery was held in a similar manner to the WWI draft lottery and draft
inductions into the Army began on November 18, 1940.34 The lottery system was used for three
groups of registrants, then abandoned in 1942 and not used again for the draft until 1969 during
the Vietnam conflict.35 In the interim, draftees were inducted by local boards based on required
quotas and contemporary policies for classification, age, and order of precedence.
Although some complaints arose over inequalities and inconsistencies in the draft administration,
a Gallup poll conducted in 1941 found that 93% of those polled thought the draft had been
handled fairly in their community.36 The 1940 Act also provided (under certain conditions) for
those called to service to be entitled to return to their previous job without a loss of rights or
benefits and reemployment representatives were appointed on local boards to assist veterans in
returning to their old jobs.37 Volunteers were allowed to serve; however, approximately 10 million
of the 16 million servicemembers who served during WWII were draftees.38
Consideration of a Draft for Nurses
Fol owing the invasion of Normandy in 1944 and other battles with high casualty rates, the Army was reporting a
shortage of nurses to care for the wounded and a shortfall in recruiting efforts. In his 1945 State of the Union
(SOTU) address, President Franklin D. Roosevelt called for a draft to increase the number of nurses, stating:
The inability to get the needed nurses for the Army is not due to any shortage of nurses; 280,000 registered
nurses are now practicing in this country. It has been estimated by the War Manpower Commission that
27,000 additional nurses could be made available to the armed forces without interfering too seriously with
the needs of the civilian population for nurses.
Since volunteering has not produced the number of nurses required, I urge that the Selective Service Act be
amended to provide for the induction of nurses into the armed forces. The need is too pressing to await the
outcome of further efforts at recruiting.39
Shortly after the SOTU, the House Committee on Military Affairs met to consider legislation for the registration
and draft of “trained and skil ed women nurses.”40 One version of the bil (H.R. 2277) would have required

32 First Report of the Director of Selective Service: 1940-1941. United States Selective Service System, Washington,
DC.
33Stephen E. Feinberg, “Randomization and Social Affairs: The 1970 Draft Lottery.” Science, vol. 171, no. 3968, 1971,
pp. 255–261. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1730983. Accessed 27 Apr. 2020.
34 B.W. Patch, “Revision of the Draft System,” in Editorial Research Reports 1941, vol. I, Washington, DC, CQ Press,
1941.
35 As manpower needs for the war grew, some men initially deferred were reclassified and amendments were made to
change the age bracket for eligibility. This complicated the lottery system to a point where the House Armed Services
Committee assessed it as “an involved and tiresome procedure which imposed an unnecessary operational burden on all
echelons of the Selective Service,” and thus created “considerable injustice and confusion.” Costa, John, The History
and Operation of the Selective Service System: 1917-1966, Legislative Research Service, December 12, 1969, p.
100083.
36 B. W. Patch, “Revision of the Draft System,” in Editorial Research Reports 1941, vol. I (CQ Press, 1941).
37 Lt. General Lewis B. Hershey, Director Selective Service System, Outline of Historical Background of Selective
Service and Chronology, 1965 Edition, p. 10.
38 Rafuse, John L., “United States’ Experience with Volunteer and Conscript Forces,” in Studies Prepared for the
President’s Commission on an All-Volunteer Armed Force, vol. 2. District of Columbia: U.S. GPO, 1970, p. III-1-29.
39 Franklin D. Roosevelt, State of the Union Address, January 6, 1945, p. 7. Available at
https://catalog.archives.gov/id/122204654.
40 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Military Affairs, Hearing on H.R. 1284, an Act to Insure Adequate Medical
Congressional Research Service

6

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

females between the ages of 20 and 45 who had graduated from a 2-year course of instruction to register for
selection and induction.41 In testimony, the Surgeon General recommended broadening the medical draft to also
support civilian needs, stating
It is for these reasons that I recommend the selective-service principle for professional nurses to include
minimum civilian as well as total military needs. This is total war. We must mobilize ful y to guard against
col apse on any front, military or civilian.42
Senior representatives in the nursing profession supported the initiative but called for it to be part of a Selective
Service act for all women, not just those qualified as nurses.43 Other groups opposed to the legislation claimed it
was unconstitutional to establish a draft of individuals based on their class of work or expertise, and questioned
the ability of the War Department to effectively and efficiently manage the nursing resources already at its
disposal.44
The bil to draft nurses (H.R. 2277) passed the House on March 7, 1945 by a vote of 347 to 42, and was referred
in the Senate on March 29, 1945.45 The Senate twice deferred action on the bil , and it was never enacted.
Consideration of Universal Compulsory Service
With the induction authority under the Selective Training and Service Act set to expire in 1945,
some felt that the emergency conscription program should evolve into a permanent system of
universal military training (UMT). 46 The Roosevelt Administration proposed a system that
required one year of compulsory training at age 18 for all physically qualified men. In 1945, the
congressional Committee on Postwar Military Policy held a series of open hearings on
compulsory military training.47 Those in favor of maintaining some form of conscription,
including groups like the American Legion, and the Chamber of Commerce, argued that it would
provide a deterrent to future “Hitlers and Hirohitos” as well as build the health and character of
American youth.48 Those opposed, including organized labor groups and the NAACP, contended
that continued conscription was antithetical to democratic ideals, was an inefficient mechanism
for building force structure, and led to war, international distrust, and profiteering.49 As the
Committee on Postwar Military Policy was not empowered to propose legislation, the debate did
not result in congressional action with respect to UMT.50 Instead, Congress extended the

Care for the Armed Forces, 79th Cong., 1st sess., January 19, 1945 (Washington: GPO, 1945).
41 H.R. 1666, 79th Cong., 1st sess. The bill text clarified that “wherever the word 'female' or 'she' is used, it shall be
deemed to include male nurses.”
42 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Military Affairs, Hearing on H.R. 1284, an Act to Insure Adequate Medical
Care for the Armed Forces, Statement of Dr. Thomas Parran, Surgeon General, United States Public Health Service,
79th Cong., 1st sess., January 19, 1945 (Washington: GPO, 1945), p. 54.
43 S. Congress, Senate Committee on Military Affairs, Hearing on H.R. 2277, an Act to Insure Adequate Medical Care
for the Armed Forces, 79th Cong., 1st sess., January 19, 1945 (Washington: GPO, 1945) p. 9.
44 Ibid. Statement of Mrs. Agnes Waters, Representing the National Blue Star Mothers of America, p. 117.
45 "House Votes, 342 to 42 for Bill for Draft Nurses," New York Times, March 8, 1945.
46 Proposals for compulsory military service garnered support from the Secretary of War, the Secretary of the Navy, the
Selective Service Director, and many in Congress. Huddle, F. P., “Universal Military Service,” Editorial Research
Reports 1944, vol. I (CQ Press, 1944).
47 F. Brewer, “Peacetime Conscription,” Editorial Research Reports 1945, vol. II (CQ Press, 1945).
48 F.P. Huddle, “Universal Military Service,” Editorial Research Reports 1944, vol. I (CQ Press, 1944). Gus C. Lee and
Geoffrey Y. Parker, Ending the Draft - The Story of the All Volunteer Force, DOD Human Resource Research
Organization, April 1977, p. 14.
49 Ibid.
50 Gus C. Lee and Geoffrey Y. Parker, Ending the Draft - The Story of the All Volunteer Force, DOD Human Resource
Research Organization, April 1977, p. 14.
Congressional Research Service

7

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

induction authority under the Selective Training and Service Act in 1945, and again in 1946 and
1947, allowing it to lapse on March 31, 1947.
In 1947 the Administration under President Truman again pushed for UMT, appointing a
commission to study the issue. The President’s Advisory Commission on Universal Training (the
Compton Report) advocated for UMT as “a matter of urgent necessity.”51 The Administration
subsequently proposed six months of mandatory training. This proposal was reported out of the
House Armed Services Committee in July 1947 but never brought to the House floor and was not
considered in the Senate.52
Post-World War II, the Selective Service Act of 1948
In 1947, when the authorities under the Selective Service Act expired, all functions and
responsibilities of the Selective Service System were transferred to the Office of Selective
Service Records.53 This office, by law, had a limited mandate for knowledge preservation, and
maintenance and storage of individual records. This restructuring essentially put the Selective
Service System into a deep standby mode.
By 1948, the military had shrunk in size to less than 1.5 million from a peak of 12 million in
1945. Concerned about lagging recruiting efforts and the rising power of the Soviet Union,
Congress authorized reinstatement of the draft in the Selective Service Act of 1948, which was
signed into law by President Truman on June 24, 1948.54 The act was similar to previous acts
authorizing the Selective Service System. It established registration requirements for males ages
19 to 26, and the same criminal penalties for fraudulent registration or evasion. It also dissolved
the Office of Selective Service Records and transferred its responsibilities back to the newly
established Selective Service System as an independent agency of the federal government. Under
this act, the President had authority to appoint state directors of the Selective Service System. It
also provided the authority to call National Guard and Reserve personnel into active duty to
support the administration of state and national headquarters.
Korean War and the Universal Military Training and Service Act
of 1951
The Selective Service Act of 1948 was set to expire on June 24, 1950. Due to budget constraints
and absence of an immediate threat to national security, between 1948 and 1949 conscription was
only used to fill recruiting shortfalls. On June 25, 1950, war broke out between North and South
Korea. A bill to extend the Selective Service Act of 1948 was already in conference, and the
Senate rushed to it on June 28 and it was signed by the President on June 30, 1950.55 The
following year, Congress renamed the act the Universal Military Training56 and Service Act of

51 Ibid. p. 15. President’s Advisory Commission on Universal Training, A Program for National Security, May 29,
1947, GPO, p. 2.
52 Ibid.
53 P.L. 80-26.
54 P.L. 80-759. Also known as the Elston Act.
55 “Universal Military Training and Service,” In CQ Almanac 1951, 7th ed. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly,
1952.
56 Universal military training is a term used to describe a variety of concepts under which all (typically male) citizens
would receive some minimum amount of compulsory training. Following the training some may enter active status,
some would enter active reserve units, and others could be placed on inactive status to be subject to a draft if needed.
Congressional Research Service

8

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

1951.57 The act extended the draft until July 1, 1955, and also lowered the registration age to 18.58
As the new name suggested, the law also contained a clause that would have obligated all eligible
males to perform 12 months of military service and training within a National Security Training
Corps if amended by future legislation (it was never amended).
The act did not alter the structure or functions of the SSS; however, it did require the Director to
submit an annual report to Congress on
 the number of persons registered,
 the number of persons inducted, and
 the number of deferments granted and the basis for them.
The United States inducted approximately 1.5 million men into the military (one-quarter of the
total uniformed servicemembers) under this act in support of the Korean conflict. A draft lottery
was not used in this era, rather, the DOD issued draft calls, and quotas were issued to local
boards. The local boards would then fill their quotas with those classified as “1-A,” or “eligible
for military service” by precedence as determined by policy.59 Public concerns with the draft at
this time were equitable implementation of the draft due to the broad availability of deferments
for what some saw as privileged groups. Others expressed concerns about the potential disruption
of citizens’ lives.60
Between 1950 and 1964 Congress repeatedly extended the Universal Military Training and
Service Act in four-year periods with minor amendments. During this time, volunteers made up
approximately two-thirds of the total military force with the remainder supplemented through
inductions—with some limited exceptions, the Navy, Air Force, and Marines relied on volunteers
almost entirely.61 For example, monthly draft calls in 1959 were for approximately 9,000 men out
of an eligible population of about 2.2 million.62

Switzerland, Israel, and Sweden have all implemented some form of UMT.
57 P.L. 82-51.
58 However, individuals were not liable to be drafted until 18 years and six months, and not allowed to be inducted until
they reached the age of 19.
59 Precedence policy at the time was to fill quotas with delinquents first (those who had failed to register or had
otherwise failed to meet requirements of the selective service law), followed by volunteers for induction, then 25-year-
olds down to 19-year-olds. Marshall, Burke, In Pursuit of Equity? Who Serves When Not All Serve? Report of the
National Advisory Commission on Selective Service, Washington, DC: National Advisory Commission on Selective
Service, 1967, p. 19.
60 John L Rafuse, “United States’ Experience with Volunteer and Conscript Forces,” in Studies Prepared for the
President’s Commission on an All-Volunteer Armed Force, vol. 2. District of Columbia: U.S. GPO, 1970, p III-1-32.
61 Burke Marshall, In Pursuit of Equity? Who Serves When Not All Serve? Report of the National Advisory Commission
on Selective Service, Washington, DC: National Advisory Commission on Selective Service, 1967, p. 11.
62 “Draft Extension,” in CQ Almanac 1959, 15th ed., 08-269-08-270. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, 1960.
Congressional Research Service

9

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

The Doctor Draft and The Berry Plan
A 1950 amendment to the Selective Service Act of 1948, commonly referred to as the Doctor Draft, provided for
the “special registration, classification, and induction of certain medical, dental, and allied specialist categories.”63
The law allowed for draft calls for medical professionals up to 50 years of age for a period of service for no longer
than 21 months. The law also established a National Advisory Committee to coordinate with states and localities
to ensure that consideration was given to the needs of the civilian populations in communities with few medical
personnel. Members of the reserve component were not liable for registration or induction. The law, however,
also provided a special pay entitlement to reserve medical and dental officers involuntarily ordered to active duty,
as well as to those volunteering for active duty. This was designed as in incentive for draft-liable medical
professionals to voluntarily serve in lieu of being inducted as an enlisted member.64
The Doctor Draft was extended twice. Amendments in 1955 reduced the age limit to 46 and allowed it to expire
on July 1, 1957.65 At that time, facing objections to the draft from organizations such as the American Medical
Association, DOD indicated that it would not seek a further extension of the authorization.66 In the meantime,
DOD had also initiated other mechanisms incentivizing medical service. Dr. Frank B. Berry, who served as
the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health and Medical Affairs starting in 1954, implemented a program under
which both civilian hospitals and the military were able to meet staffing needs. This program, which came to be
known as The Berry Plan, allowed doctors to defer obligatory military service until completion of medical education
and training.67 Those that did not choose one of the options risked being drafted through the regular registration
process, which encouraged participation. It is estimated that about two-thirds of physicians that served between
1950 and 1973 were obtained through the draft or through the Berry Plan. 68
The Vietnam War and Proposals for Draft Reform
In 1964, when America significantly escalated its military involvement in Vietnam, conscription
was again used to mobilize manpower and augment the volunteer force. Among the criticisms of
the draft system during this period were that it was inequitable and discriminatory since the
chance of being drafted varied by state, by local community, and by one’s economic status. In the
late 1960s, public acceptance of the draft began to erode for the following reasons, inter alia:69
 Opposition to the war in Vietnam.
 The U.S. Army’s desire for change due to discipline problems among some
Vietnam draftees.
 Belief that the state did not have a right to impose military service on young men
without consent.
 Belief that the draft was an unfair “tax” being imposed only on young men in
their late teens and twenties.70

63 P.L. 81-779, Sep. 9, 1950. The allied specialist category included veterinarians, optometrists, pharmacists, and
osteopaths.
64 DOD, Military Compensation Background Papers, 8th Edition, July 2018, p. 432.
65 P.L. 84-118.
66 DOD, "A Message from the A.M.A," U.S. Armed Forces Medical Journal, vol. VIII, no. 1 (1957), p. 130.
67 The plan offered three choices, 1) service immediately after internship, 2) service after one year of residency
following internship with a return to the residency post-service, and 3) full residency training in a specialty of the
doctor’s choice prior to service. Frank B. Berry, M.D., "The Story of "The Berry Plan"," Bull NY Academy of Medicine,
vol. 52, no. 3 (1976), p. 281.
68 Gus C. Lee and Geoffrey Y. Parker, Ending the Draft - the Story of the All Volunteer Force, Final Report, DOD,
Human Resources Research Organization Alexandria, VA, April 1977, p. 327.
69 Bernard D. Rostker, I Want You! The Evolution of the All-Volunteer Force, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA,
2006.
70 For example, if pay would have to be $25,000 per year to attract sufficient volunteers to military service, but these
Congressional Research Service

10

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

 Perception of some observers that the draft placed an unfair burden on
underprivileged members of society.71
 Demographic change increasing the size of the eligible population for military
service relative to the needs of the military.72
 Estimations that an all-volunteer force could be fielded within acceptable budget
levels.73
In response to some of these concerns and associated political pressures, President Lyndon B.
Johnson issued Executive Order 11289 on July 2, 1966, establishing the National Advisory
Commission on Selective Service headed by Burke Marshall. President Johnson instructed the
commission to consider past, present, and prospective functioning of the Selective Service
System and other systems of national service, taking into account the following factors:
 Fairness to all citizens,
 Military manpower requirements,
 Minimizing uncertainty and interference with individuals’ careers and
educations,
 National social, economic, and employment goals, and
 Budgetary and administrative considerations.
The commission examined a number of potential options from requiring everyone to serve to
elimination of all compulsory service. The commission’s final report, In Pursuit of Equity: Who
Serves When not all Serve?,was delivered to the President in February 1967 at the time when the
Selective Service law was up for renewal. The commission recommended continuing conscription
but making significant changes to the Selective Service System to “assure equal treatment for
those in like circumstances.”74 Among these recommended changes were (1) adopting an
impartial and random selection process and order of call, (2) consolidating the local boards under
centralized administration with uniform policies for classification, deferment, and exemptions,
and (3) ensuring that composition of local boards was representative of the population that they
served.75
In parallel with the Presidential Commission’s review, the House Armed Services Committee
chartered their own review with a civilian advisory panel chaired by retired Army General Mark

volunteers are instead drafted at $17,000 per year, the draftees pay a tax of $8,000 per year each.
71 For a further discussion of these issues see CRS Report R44321, Diversity, Inclusion, and Equal Opportunity in the
Armed Services: Background and Issues for Congress, by Kristy N. Kamarck.
72 The male youth cohort age 18-27 in 1942 was approximately 10.7 million. By 1965, this age cohort was 12.5 million.
73 Previous arguments against the all-volunteer force had been that the cost of recruiting and retaining such a force
would put a significant strain on military budgets, and that it would not be viable in the event of a large scale conflict
with high casualties.
74 National Advisory Commission on Selective Service, In Pursuit of Equity: Who Serves When Not All Serve, GPO,
Washington, DC, 1967, p. 4, 8-9. According to the Commission’s report, the deciding factor in rejecting an exclusively
all-volunteer force was the inability of such a system to rapidly procure large numbers of men if they were needed in a
crisis. Compulsory universal national service was rejected by the commission who cited a lack of constitutional basis
for such service.
75 In some case, the board composition was not demographically representative of the population that they served. The
commission found that members of local boards were all male, mostly veterans, mostly white-collar workers, and
almost exclusively white. National Advisory Commission on Selective Service, In Pursuit of Equity: Who Serves When
Not All Serve, GPO, Washington, DC, 1967, p. 19.
Congressional Research Service

11

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

Clark. The Clark panel also recommended against shifting to an all-volunteer force but disagreed
on the establishment of a lottery.76
In 1967, Congress extended the SSS through July 1, 1971, under the renamed Military Selective
Service Act of 1967 (henceforth MSSA). While the Administration had pushed for
comprehensive draft reform based on the commission’s recommendations, the bill contained few
of President Lyndon Johnson’s proposals. In particular, the bill, as enacted, prohibited the
President from establishing a random system of selection (draft lottery) without congressional
approval.77
In 1969, President Richard M. Nixon called on Congress to provide the authority to institute the
draft lottery system. In response, Congress amended the 1967 law, repealing the prohibition on
the President’s authority. 78 On the same day, President Nixon signed Executive Order 11497
establishing the order of call for the draft lottery for men aged 19 through 25 at the end of
calendar year 1969. In the first year, all males age 19 through 25 were to be in the lottery. After
that, only those who turned 19 each year were entered into the lottery, and were susceptible for a
single year to being drafted.
While the draft remained contentious, in 1971 the induction authority under the MSSA was again
extended through 1973.79 In response to concerns regarding the composition of local boards, the
bill stated,
The President is requested to appoint the membership of each local board so that to the
maximum extent practicable it is proportionately representative of the race and national
origin of those registrants within its district.
The bill also included a significant pay raise for military members as a first step toward building
an all-volunteer force.
The Gates Commission
Two months into President Nixon’s first term, he launched the President’s Commission on an All-
Volunteer Force, which came to be known as the Gates Commission. In its 1970 report, the
commission unanimously recommended that “the nation’s best interests will be better served by
an all-volunteer force, supported by an effective standby draft, than by a mixed force of
volunteers and conscripts.”80 The Gates Commission also recommended maintaining a Selective
Service System that would be responsible for
 a register of all males who might be conscripted when essential for national
security,
 a system for selection of inductees,

76 Bernard D. Rostker, I Want You! The Evolution of the All-Volunteer Force, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA,
2006, p. 31.
77 This Administration proposal, called the FAIR (fair and impartial random) system, had been a key component of the
proposed reform package. “Message to Congress: Johnson on Selective Service,” in CQ Almanac 1967, 23rd ed.,
Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, 1968.
78 Selective Service Amendment Act of 1969 (P.L. 91-124).
79 Due to a lengthy debate in Congress and fierce opposition to maintaining the draft, the legislation was delayed and
the draft was not in effect for nearly three months from July 1, 1971, to September 28, 1971, when the draft extension
(P.L. 92-129) was signed into law. “Draft Extended After War, Foreign Policy Debate.” in CQ Almanac 1971, 27th ed.,
06-257-06-296. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, 1972.
80 The Report of the President's Commission on an All-Volunteer Armed Force, February 1970.
Congressional Research Service

12

link to page 17 The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

 specific procedures for the notification, examination, and induction of those to be
conscripted,
 an organization to maintain the register and administer the procedures for
induction, and
 the provision that a standby draft system may be invoked only by resolution of
Congress at the request of the President.81
The last draft calls were issued in December 1972 and the statutory authority to induct expired on
June 30, 1973.82 On January 27, 1973, Secretary of Defense Melvin R. Laird announced the end
of conscription. The last man to be inducted through the draft entered the Army on June 30,
1973.83
Table 1shows the number of inductees and total participants for each major conflict in which the
United States used the draft and for which data are available. More than half of the participants in
WWI and nearly two-thirds of the WWII participants were draftees. About one-quarter of the
participants in the Korean and Vietnam conflicts were draftees, however, it should be noted that
the possibility of being drafted may have induced higher rates of volunteerism during these later
conflicts.84
Table 1. Draft Inductees and Total Participants in Major Conflicts
% Conscripts of Total
Conflict
Total Conscripts
Total Participants
Participants
Civil War (Union only)
168,649*
2,690,401
6.2%
WWI
2,810,296
4,734,991
59.4%
WWII
10,110,104
16,112,566
62.7%
Korea
1,529,539
5,720,000
26.7%
Vietnam
1,857,304
8,744,000
21.3%
Source: Total conscripts are those inducted into service as reported by the Selective Service System
(https://www.sss.gov/About/History-And-Records/Induction-Statistics). Total participants are from the
Department of Veterans Affairs at http://www.va.gov/opa/publications/factsheets/fs_americas_wars.pdf. Civil War
data are taken from Crowder, E.H., Second Report of the Provost Marshal General to the Secretary of War On the
Operations of the Selective Service System to December 20, 1918, GPO, Washington, DC, 1919, p. 376.
Notes: Figures for total participants are rounded to the nearest thousand in the source document for Vietnam
and Korea. The total number of conscripts in the Civil War is only those actually inducted into service and
includes those who were furnished as substitutes but excludes those who were drafted but paid a commutation
in lieu of service.

81 The Report of the President's Commission on an All-Volunteer Armed Force, February 1970.
82 Selective Service System, Semiannual Report of the Director of Selective Service, Together with A Report on the
1980 National Selective Service Registration, January 30, 1981, 1983, p. 2.
83 The last man was a draft evader who actually had been called in 1969, but fought his induction. The federal
government responded with an indictment for failure to report. Finally, facing a courthouse offer to serve or be
imprisoned, he reported for induction. Dwight Elliott Stone, the last draftee, was inducted into the United States Army
on June 30, 1973, the last day inductions were authorized. David Wood, "Last Draftee, Who Tried to Hide, Now
Believes in Service," Seattle Times, June 22, 1993.
84 The RAND Corporation estimated that 77% of non-prior service accessions during the Vietnam conflict were
motivated by the draft lottery. Bernard D. Rostker, I Want You! The Evolution of the All-Volunteer Force, RAND
Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, 2006, p. 245.
Congressional Research Service

13

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

All-Volunteer Force (AVF) and a Standby SSS
President Gerald Ford temporarily suspended the registration requirement through Proclamation
4360 (89 Stat. 1255) in April 1975.85 The MSSA was not repealed, however, and the requirement
for the SSS to be ready to provide untrained manpower in a military emergency remained. This
proclamation essentially put the SSS into deep standby mode. Between 1975 and 1977, the SSS
reduced operational functions and shifted into a new role as a planning agency.86 At the time there
were approximately 98 full-time staff operating a pared-down field structure with a national
headquarters and nine regional headquarters.87 In the late 1970s, some were concerned that this
“deep standby” system did not have the resources or infrastructure to register, select, classify, and
deliver the first inductees within 30 days from the start of an emergency mobilization.88
These concerns became even more salient when, in December 1979, the Soviet Union invaded
Afghanistan. In his January 1980 State of the Union address, President Jimmy Carter announced
his intention to resume draft registration requirements in the coming year.89 A Gallup Poll
conducted in March 1980 found that 76% were in favor of a registration requirement for young
men.90 Congress responded by providing $13.3 million in appropriations for the Selective Service
System on June 25, 1980.91 President Carter signed Proclamation 4771 on July 2, 1980,
reinstating the requirement for all 18- to 25-year-old males to register for the Selective Service,
under the authority provided by the MSSA.92 Penalties for failing to register were the same as
those first established in the 1940 Selective Training and Service Act (a fine of up to $10,000
and/or a prison term of up to five years). However, unlike in previous draft registration
regulations, there was no requirement for men to undergo evaluation and classification for fitness
to serve.
The core functions of the reinstated SSS had five key components that are still largely in place
today:
 A registration process that is reliable and efficient.
 An automated data processing system that could handle pre- and post-
mobilization requirements.

85 Selective Service System at http://www.sss.gov/induct.htm.
86 Gus C. Lee and Geoffrey Y. Parker, Ending the Draft - the Story of the All Volunteer Force, Final Report, DOD,
Human Resources Research Organization Alexandria, VA, April 1977.
87 Prior to being placed in standby, the SSS was supported by nearly 1,000 area offices, state headquarters, and between
3,000 and 4,000 local volunteer boards. Congressional Budget Office, The Selective Service System: Mobilization
Capabilities and Options for Improvement, Washington, DC, November 1978.
88 The 30-day time frame was based on DOD’s projected wartime mobilization requirements. Congressional Budget
Office, The Selective Service System: Mobilization Capabilities and Options for Improvement, Washington, DC,
November 1978.
89 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Armed Services, Presidential Recommendations for Selective Service Reform,
committee print, 96th Cong., 2nd sess., February 11, 1980 (Washington: GPO, 1980).
90 The question posed was “Would you favor or oppose the registration of the names of all young men so that in the
event of an emergency the time needed to call up men for a draft would be reduced.” Selective Service System,
Semiannual Report of the Director of Selective Service, Together with A Report on the 1980 National Selective Service
Registration, January 30, 1981, 1983, p. 5.
91 $8.6 million was for the registration of young males, and $4.7 million was for improving the SSS’s computing
capability. “Congress Approves Draft Registration,” CQ Almanac 1980, 36th ed., 39-46. Washington, DC:
Congressional Quarterly, 1981.
92 94 Stat. 3775.
Congressional Research Service

14

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

 A system for promulgation and distribution of orders for induction.
 A claims process that can quickly insure all registrants’ rights to due process are
protected.
 A field structure that can support the claims process.93
Supporters of reestablishing the registration requirement for men argued that it would send a
message to the Soviet Union that the United States was prepared to act to defend its interests and
also that it would cut down the mobilization time in the event of a national emergency. Some
argued that registration was not enough, and advocated for a return of peacetime conscription,
universal military training, or compulsory national service.94
Organizations opposed to the reinstatement of registration requirements argued that registration
forms were illegal because they required registrants to disclose their Social Security numbers.
Others argued that the exemption of women in the draft law was unconstitutional.95 Carter’s
proposal to Congress included legislative language that would have given the President the
authority to register women. As justification for this proposal, he stated,
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.96
Congress rejected the President’s proposal to include women with an explanation under Title VIII
of S. Rept. 96-826,
[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.
In 1981, the Supreme Court heard a challenge to the exception for women to register for Selective
Service. In the Rostker v. Goldberg case,the Court held that the practice of only registering men
for the draft was constitutional.97 In the majority opinion, Justice William Rehnquist wrote

93 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Armed Services, Presidential Recommendations for Selective Service Reform,
committee print, 96th Cong., 2nd sess., February 11, 1980 (Washington: GPO, 1980).
94 “Congress Approves Draft Registration,” CQ Almanac 1980, 36th ed., 39-46. Washington, DC: Congressional
Quarterly, 1981.
95 At the time, women accounted for approximately 8% of the active duty force, but were prohibited from serving in
certain combat units and occupations by law and policy. For more information on the history of women in the Armed
Forces, see CRS Report R44321, Diversity, Inclusion, and Equal Opportunity in the Armed Services: Background and
Issues for Congress, by Kristy N. Kamarck.
96 Statement by the President, Office of the White House Press Secretary, February 8, 1980, as recorded in Selective
Service System, Semiannual Report of the Director of Selective Service together with a Report on the 1980 National
Selective Service Registration, April 1, 1980-September 30, 1980, January 30, 1981, p. 18-19.
97 453 U.S. 57 (1981).
Congressional Research Service

15

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

[t]he existence of the combat restrictions 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.
New Penalties for Registration Noncompliance
The first national registration after the reinstatement of the requirement was held in 1980 through
registration at local U.S. Post Offices.98 The registration rate for the 1980 registration was 87%
within the two-week registration period and 95% through the fourth month of registrations. In
1973, the registration rates were 77% within 30 days of one’s 18th birthday as required by statute,
and 90% through the fourth month.99 The Comptroller General estimated that, of the registrations
submitted, there was a final accuracy level of 98%.100
Despite initial successes in registration, there was a push by many in Congress and the Reagan
Administration to maintain public awareness of the requirements and to maintain high
compliance rates. On January 21, 1982, President Ronald Reagan authorized a grace period until
February 28, 1982, allowing those who had not registered to do so. In 1982, the Department of
Justice (DOJ) began prosecution of those men who willfully refused to register for selective
service.101 In the June 1983 SSS semiannual report to Congress, the agency reported that it had
referred 341 persons to DOJ for investigation. At the time of the report, there were 11 indictments
and 2 convictions.
In the same year, there was a movement in Congress to tie eligibility for federal benefits to
registration requirements. National Defense Authorization bills for Fiscal Year 1983 were
reported to the House and Senate floor without any proposed amendments to the MSSA.
However, on May 12, 1982, the bill was amended by Senators Hayakawa and Mattingly on the
Senate floor to prohibit young male adults from receiving any federal student assistance under
Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. §§1001 et. seq.) if they cannot certify
they had registered with Selective Service. The Senate passed the amendment as drafted by voice
vote. Representative Jerry Solomon introduced a similar amendment on the House floor. In
conference committee, Members added language to direct the Secretary of Education and the
Director of Selective Service to jointly develop methods for certifying registration.102 This
provision amending the MSSA was signed into law as part of the FY1983 NDAA with an
effective date of July 1, 1983.103
Representative Solomon also led the effort to attach similar language to the Job Training
Partnership Act of 1982, which was passed on October 13, 1982.104 This law prohibited those who
failed to register from receiving certain federal job training assistance. Congress repealed the Job

98 Former Director of the Selective Service System from November 26, 1979, to July 31, 1981, Bernard Rostker,
attributed the high rates of compliance and accuracy to the individual accountability imposed by face-to-face
registrations.
99 Selective Service System, Semiannual Report of the Director of Selective Service, Together with a Report on the
1980 National Selective Service Registration, January 30, 1981, 1983, p. 13.
100 Ibid., p. 12.
101 Selective Service System, Semiannual Report of the Director of Selective Service, October 1, 1982-March 31, 1983,
June 8, 1983.
102 The provision became widely known as the “Solomon Amendment.”
103 P.L. 97-252 §1113.
104 P.L. 97-300 §504.
Congressional Research Service

16

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

Training and Partnership Act and replaced it with the Workforce Investment Act of 1998;
however, the statutory language enforcing the MSSA was maintained in the new law.105
In 1985, Congress added a provision to FY1986 NDAA that made an individual ineligible for
federal civil service appointments if he “is not registered and knowingly and willfully did not so
register before the requirement terminated or became inapplicable to the individual.”106 Congress
also expressed support for the peacetime registration program as a “contribution to national
security by reducing the time required for full defense mobilization,” and as sending “an
important signal to our allies and to our potential adversaries of the United States defense
commitment.”107
On November 6, 1986, President Reagan signed into law the Immigration Reform and Control
Act.108 This law required males between the ages of 18 and 26 who are applying for legalization
under the act to register for the Selective Service if they have not already done so. In response,
the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and the SSS established procedures for
registering young men as part of the immigration application process.109
The Healthcare Personnel Delivery System (HCPDS)
In the early 1980s, Congress raised concerns about readiness of the medical force and the ability of the Services
to mobilize necessary medical personnel to deliver casualty care in the event of a war. The General Accounting
Office (GAO) was asked to review this question and in 1981 released a report with recommendations for DOD,
SSS, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
for improving wartime medical preparedness.110 GAO found that if mobilization for major conflict were to occur,
DOD would not be able to meet medical personnel requirements, with the report stating,
shortages of physicians, nurses, and enlisted medical personnel would be most severe, would reduce
capability to deliver wartime care, and would begin to occur soon after mobilization. Shortages of surgical
personnel would be especial y critical because theater of operations requirements could not be met.111
Another finding was that while the civilian sector likely had sufficient medical personnel to augment the force, the
responsible agencies did not have adequate plans in place to mobilize and train civilian practitioners to provide
effective wartime care.112
With respect to the SSS, the GAO noted that there was no authority that would provide for a draft of individuals
with specialty skil s. As such, GAO recommended that DOD and SSS jointly develop legislative provisions for a
standby post-mobilization draft of civilian medical personnel. By request of the SSS, in 1987 Congress authorized
SSS spending to “design and develop such a standby system to prepare for the post-mobilization registration and
classification of persons with essential health care delivery skil s.”113 This law expanded the SSS mandate to also

105 P.L. 105-220 §188(h).
106 P.L. 99-145 §1622. The amendment was introduced in the Senate by Senator Strom Thurmond with broad support,
and became known as the “Thurmond Amendment.”
107 P.L. 99-145 §1621.
108 P.L. 99-603 §245A(4)(D).
109 Selective Service System, Semiannual Report of the Director of Selective Service, April 1, 1983-April 1, 1983,
September 30, 1983, p. 10.
110 U.S. General Accounting Office, Will There Be Enough Trained Medical Personnel in Care of War, HRD-81-67,
June 24, 1981, http://archive.gao.gov/f0102/115603.pdf.
111 Ibid., p. i.
112 The report also noted training and proficiency deficiencies for combat-oriented care among existing Army medical
personnel, p. ii.
113 P.L. 100-180 §703; 50 U.S.C. §3809(h); U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Armed Services, National Defense
Authorization Act for FY88 and FY89, 100th Cong., May 8, 1987, S. Rpt 100-57.
Congressional Research Service

17

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

include responsibility to maintain “a structure for registration and classification of persons qualified for practice or
employment in a health care occupation essential to the maintenance of the Armed Forces.”114
The standby system developed under this law is called the Health Care Personnel Delivery System (HCPDS). The
system is designed to be implemented by the SSS in a national emergency if legislated by the Congress and
approved by the President. Fol owing these approvals, the SSS would conduct a mass registration of both male and
female health care workers between the ages of 20 and 45.115
Other Legislative Action since 1980
Between 1980 and 2021, several Members of Congress proposed a number of legislative changes
to the MSSA; however, none have been enacted. Typically, such proposed changes to the MSSA
have included one or more of the following options:
 Repeal the entire MSSA.116
 Terminate the registration requirement.117
 Reinstate draft induction authority.118
 Defund the Selective Service System.119
 Require women to register for the draft.120
 Remove or reduce penalties for failing to register.
In terms of penalties for failing to register, in December 2020, a provision of the FAFSA
Simplification Act, enacted as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (Title VII,
Section 702(s) of P.L. 116-260), amends the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. §1087kk)
allowing those who have not registered for the Selective Service to be eligible for federal student
aid. The law directs ED to implement these provisions no later than July 1, 2023, but gives the
agency the authority to implement them earlier.121
Other proposed changes would seek to modify SSS record management or registration
processes.122 These options are discussed in more detail later in this report.
National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service
In the FY2017 NDAA (P.L. 114-328), Congress established a National Commission on Military,
National, and Public Service to help consider some of the options for the future of the MSSA.
The commission is tasked not only with a review of the military selective service process, but
also with proposing “methods to increase participation in military, national, and other public

114 P.L. 100-180 §715.
115 Selective Service System, Return to the Draft, accessed on March 30, 2020 at https://www.sss.gov/about/return-to-
draft/.
116 For example, H.R. 2509 and S. 1139 (117th).
117 For example, H.R. 1495 (109th).
118 For example, S. 1697 (98th).
119 For example, H.Amdt. 37 to H.R. 1 (112th) or H.Amdt. 1232 to H.R. 5485 (114th).
120 For example, H.R. 747 (113th), H.R. 4478 (114th), H.R. 1509 (114th), and H.R. 6415 (116th)
121 P.L. 116-260, Section 702(s), p. 1957. See also 86 Federal Register 115, June 17, 2021, pp. 32252-32253.
122 For example, H.R. 5945 (116th). H.R. 4141 (115th)/ or H.R. 4412 (115th).
Congressional Research Service

18

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

service, in order to address national security and other public service needs of the Nation.”123 The
statutory scope of the commission is to review
(1) The need for a military selective service process, including the continuing need for a
mechanism to draft large numbers of replacement combat troops;
(2) means by which to foster a greater attitude and ethos of service among United States
youth, including an increased propensity for military service;
(3) the feasibility and advisability of modifying the military selective service process in
order to obtain for military, national, and public service individuals with skills (such as
medical, dental, and nursing skills, language skills, cyber skills, and science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM) skills) for which the Nation has a critical need,
without regard to age or sex; and
(4) the feasibility and advisability of including in the military selective service process, as
so modified, an eligibility or entitlement for the receipt of one or more Federal benefits
(such as educational benefits, subsidized or secured student loans, grants or hiring
preferences) specified by the Commission for purposes of the review.
Section 552 of the FY2017 NDAA also required DOD to prepare a preliminary report on the
purpose and utility of the SSS to support the commission’s work, to include
(1) A detailed analysis of the current benefits derived, both directly and indirectly, from
the Military Selective Service System, including— (A) the extent to which mandatory
registration benefits military recruiting; (B) the extent to which a national registration
capability serves as a deterrent to potential enemies of the United States; and (C) the extent
to which expanding registration to include women would impact these benefits.
(2) An analysis of the functions currently performed by the Selective Service System that
would be assumed by the Department of Defense in the absence of a national registration
capability.
(3) 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.
(4) 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.
(5) A detailed analysis of the Department’s personnel needs in the event of an emergency
requiring mass mobilization, including— (A) a detailed timeline, along with the factors
considered in arriving at this timeline, of when the Department would require— (i) the first
inductees to report for service; (ii) the first 100,000 inductees to report for service; and (iii)
the first medical personnel to report for service; and (B) 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.
(6) A list of the assumptions used by the Department when conducting its analysis in
preparing the report.
DOD submitted its congressionally mandated report in July 2017. The report noted that the
department “currently has no operational plans that envision mobilization at a level that would
require conscription.” Nevertheless, it acknowledges that, “the readiness of the underlying

123 P.L. 114-328.
Congressional Research Service

19

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

systems, infrastructure, and processes to effect [a draft] – serve as a quiet but important hedge
against an unknowable future.”124
GAO’s report, released in January 2018, noted that DOD’s requirements and timeline for
mobilization of forces remain unchanged since 1994, despite changes to force structure,
capability needs, national security environment, and strategic objectives.125 In particular, the
report authors stated the following:
DOD provided the personnel requirements and a timeline that was developed in 1994 and
that have not been updated since. These requirements state that, in the event of a draft, the
first inductees are to report to a Military Entrance Processing Station in 193 days and the
first 100,000 inductees would report for service in 210 days. DOD’s report states that the
all-volunteer force is of adequate size and composition to meet DOD’s personnel needs
and it has no operational plans that envision mobilization at a level that would require a
draft. Officials stated that the personnel requirements and timeline developed in 1994 are
still considered realistic. Thus, they did not conduct any additional analysis to update the
plans, personnel requirements, or timelines for responding to an emergency requiring mass
mobilization.
The authors stated that the GAO’s 2012 recommendation that DOD “establish a process of
periodically reevaluating DOD’s requirements for the Selective Service System in light of
changing operating environments, threats, and strategic guidance” remains valid.
The National Commission on Military, National and Public Service released an interim report on
its preliminary research findings on January 23, 2019. The commission released its final report on
March 25, 2020.126
With respect to the Selective Service and the draft the commission made several
recommendations:
 Maintain a military draft mechanism in the event of national emergencies;
 Formalize a national call for volunteers prior to activating the draft;
 Retain the Selective Service System's current registration posture;
 Convey to registrants their potential obligation for military service;
 Ensure a fair, equitable, and transparent draft, including a mechanism to allow
corrective registration and avoid lifelong penalties;
 Develop new voluntary models for accessing personnel with critical skills;
 Improve the readiness of the National Mobilization System through
institutionalized exercises and better accountability; and
 Extend Selective Service registration to women.127

124 Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, Report on the Purpose and Utility of a
Registration System for Military Selective Service, July 2017, pp. 2 & 10.
125 U.S. Government Accountability Office, National Security: Ongoing Review of the Military Selective Service
Process Could Benefit from Additional Information, GAO-18-226, January 2018, p. 11,
https://www.gao.gov/assets/690/689390.pdf.
126 National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service, Inspired to Serve, Final Report, March 2020,
https://inspire2serve.gov/reports/final-report.
127 Ibid.
Congressional Research Service

20

link to page 25 The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

The commission made several other recommendations to increase civic education and outreach,
strengthen military recruiting and marketing, incentivize and expand national service, and
improve personnel management in the military and federal civil service.128
Inspire to Serve Act; Draft Legislation
The National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service provided a Legislative Annex containing the
legislative proposals as required by Section 555(e)(1) of the National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year
2017 (P.L. 114-328). These proposals were presented in the form of a consolidated bil , the Inspire to Serve Act of
2020. The Inspire to Serve Act of 2020 (H.R. 6415) was introduced in the 116th Congress.
Selective Service Registration
Today, nearly all males residing in the United States—U.S. citizens and documented or
undocumented immigrant men—are required to register with the Selective Service if they are at
least 18 years old and are not yet 26 years old. Those who are required to register must do so
within 30 days of their 18th birthday unless exemptions apply as listed in Table 2. Men born from
March 29, 1957, to December 31, 1959, were never required to register because the registration
program was not in effect at the time they turned 18. Individuals are not allowed to register
beyond their 26th birthday. Women are currently not required to register for the Selective Service.
Federal regulations state, “No person who is not required by selective service law or the
Proclamation of the President to register shall be registered.”129 All of those required to register
would be considered “available for service” in the case of an emergency mobilization unless they
were reclassified by the SSS.130
Table 2. Who Is Required to Register for the Selective Service?
Category
YES
NO
All male U.S. citizens born after Dec. 31, 1959, who are 18 but not yet 26 years old, except
√

as noted below:
Military Related

Members of the Armed Forces on active duty (active duty for training does not constitute

√*
“active duty” for registration purposes)
Cadets and Midshipmen at Service Academies or Coast Guard Academy

√*
Cadets at the Merchant Marine Academy
√

Students in Officer Procurement Programs at the Citadel, North Georgia Col ege and State
University, Norwich University, Virginia Military Institute, Texas A&M University, Virginia

√*
Polytechnic Institute and State University
Reserve Officers’ Training Corps Students
√

National Guardsmen and Reservists not on active duty/Civil Air Patrol members
√

Delayed Entry Program enlistees
√

128 According to P.L. 114-328, the law establishing the commission’s mandate, “military service” includes service in
the active and reserve components of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Space Force, as well as service in
the commissioned corps of the Public Health Service and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
129 32 C.F.R. §1615.5.
130 For a description of those who might be eligible to for deferments or exemptions, please see text box titled
“Categories for Exemption or Deferment under Current SSS Operating Procedures.”
Congressional Research Service

21

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

Category
YES
NO
Separatees from Active Military Service, separated for any reason before age 26
√*

Men rejected for enlistment for any reason before age 26
√

**Immigrants

Lawful nonimmigrants on visas (e.g., diplomatic and consular personnel and families, foreign

√
students, tourists with unexpired Form I-94, or Border Crossing Document DSP-150)
Permanent resident immigrants (USCIS Form I-551)/Undocumented immigrants
√

Special agricultural workers
√

Seasonal agricultural workers (H-2A Visa)

√
Refugee, parolee, and asylum immigrants
√

Dual national U.S. citizens
√

Confined

Incarcerated, or hospitalized, or institutionalized for medical reasons

√*
Handicapped Physically or Mentally

Able to function in public with or without assistance
√

Continually confined to a residence, hospital, or institution

√
Gender Change/Transgender

Individuals who are born female and changed their gender to male

√
U.S. citizens or immigrants who are born male and change their gender to female
√

Source: Selective Service Agency (https://www.sss.gov/Registration/Who-Must-Register/Chart).
Notes: * These individuals must register within 30 days of release unless already age 26. To be ful y exempt the
individual must have been on active duty or confined continuously from age 18 to 26.
** Residents of Puerto Rico, Guam, Virgin Islands, and Northern Mariana Islands are U.S. citizens. Citizens of
American Samoa are nationals and must register when they are habitual residents in the United States or reside
in the United States for at least one year. Habitual residence is presumed and registration is required whenever a
national or a citizen of the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, or Palau resides
in the United States for more than one year in any status, except when the individual resides in the United States
as an employee of the government of his homeland; or as a student who entered the United States for the
purpose of ful -time studies, as long as such person maintains that status. Immigrants who did not enter the
United States or maintained their lawful nonimmigrant status by continually remaining on a valid visa until after
they were 26 years old were never required to register. Also, immigrants born before 1960 who did not enter
the United States or maintained their lawful nonimmigrant status by continually remaining on a valid visa until
after March 29, 1975, were never required to register.
Processes for Registration
Almost all Selective Service registrations are completed electronically; however, registration can
also be done at U.S. Post Offices and by submission of paper registrations.131 Forty-one states,
four territories, and the District of Columbia (DC) have driver’s license legislation that provides
for automatic Selective Service registration when obtaining a driver’s license, driver’s permit, or

131 The SSS reported that it received 92% of registrations electronically in FY2019. Selective Service System, Annual
Report to the Congress of the United States: Fiscal Year 2019, Office of Public and Intergovernmental Affairs, 2019, p.
7. Handwritten paper registration forms require manual entry of data by Selective Service System staff.
Congressional Research Service

22

link to page 28 The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

other form of identification from the 1 million Department of Motor Vehicles.132 In FY2020, 44%
of all registrations, representing just over one million young men, were conducted electronically
as part of state driver’s license legislation requirements (see Figure 1).133
The SSS also has interagency agreements for registration. In cooperation with U.S. Citizenship
and Immigration Services (USCIS), immigrant men ages 18 through 25 who are accepted for
permanent U.S. residence are registered automatically. In addition, men of registration age who
apply for an immigrant visa through the Department of State are also registered. The SSS has
existing data-sharing relationships with the DOD for new enlistments and the Department of
Labor for applicants under the Workforce and Innovation Opportunity Act.134
The Department of Education also shares data with the SSS. The Federal Application for Student
Aid (FAFSA) form includes a “register me” checkbox for those who have not yet registered for
the Selective Service. 135 This authorizes the SSS to automatically register those individuals. For
FY2020 approximately 23% of electronic registrant data came from the Department of Education
(ED) as part of the Pell Grant student aid application process.136
Impact of the FAFSA Simplification Act
The enactment of the FAFSA Simplification Act in 2020 (P.L. 116-260), wil eliminate the FAFSA mode of
registration and penalties for falling to register, potentially affecting nearly one-half mil ion registrations annually.
The SSS reports it is working with executive branch officials to find ways to mitigate potential registration
losses.137 The option to register via the FAFSA form is planned to continue until October 1, 2023.

132 States that did not have driver’s license legislation (DLL) at the end of FY2019 included Alaska, California,
Massachusetts, Nebraska, New Jersey, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, and Wyoming. The Alaska Permanent Fund
was created by the state of Alaska to pay Alaska residents a cash dividend from oil revenues. Under Alaska state law,
before Alaska male residents can qualify for benefits from the Alaska Permanent Fund, they must be registered with the
Selective Service System. Therefore, in Alaska there is limited value in DLL since the overwhelming majority of
Alaska male residents are either already registered or will register to qualify for the benefits of this Fund.
133 Selective Service System, Annual Report to the Congress of the United States: Fiscal Year 2019, Office of Public
and Intergovernmental Affairs, 2019, p. 8.
134 P.L. 113-128.
135 See questions 21 and 22 on the 2020-2021 Free Application for Student Aid (FAFSA) form,
https://studentaid.gov/sites/default/files/2020-21-fafsa.pdf.
136 Selective Service System, Annual Report to the Congress of the United States: Fiscal Year 2019, Office of Public
and Intergovernmental Affairs, 2019, p. 8.
137 E-mail correspondence between SSS and CRS on August 11, 2021.
Congressional Research Service

23

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

Figure 1. Registrations by Method of Registration
FY2020

Source: Selective Service System, Annual Report to the Congress of the United States: Fiscal Year 2020, Office of
Public and Intergovernmental Affairs, p. 7.
Registration compliance rate for the 18- through 25-year old age group was 92% in calendar year
2019, above the SSS goal of 90%.138 Reasons for noncompliance may include lack of awareness
of requirements or purposeful avoidance. Knowingly failing to register comes with certain
penalties including the following:
 If indicted, imprisonment of not more than five years and/or fine of not more
than $10,000 (increased to $250,000 in 1987 by 18 U.S.C. §3571(b)(3)).139
 Ineligibility for appointment to a position in an executive agency.140
 Ineligibility for certain federal job training benefits.141
 Potential ineligibility for citizenship (for certain immigrants to the United
States).142

138 Selective Service System, Annual Report to the Congress of the United States: Fiscal Year 2020, Office of Public
and Intergovernmental Affairs, p. 6.
139 50 U.S.C. §3811(a).
140 5 U.S.C. §3328 and 5 C.F.R. §300.704—Considering individuals for appointment.
141 29 U.S.C. §1504.
142 According to an internal memo from the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) on June 18, 1999, “Section
316(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) requires a naturalization applicant to prove that he or she is, and
has been for the requisite period, a person of good moral character, attached to the principles of the Constitution of the
United States, and well disposed toward the good order and happiness of the United States. Section 337(a)(5)(A) of the
INA also requires applicants to declare under oath his or her willingness to bear arms on behalf of the United States
when required by law. Therefore, it is INS policy that refusal to or knowing and willful failure to register for Selective
Service during the period for which an applicant is required to prove his compliance with § 316(a)(3) supports a finding
Congressional Research Service

24

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

 Possible inability to obtain a security clearance.143
 Ineligibility for federal student aid (amended in 2020).144
In addition, a large number of state legislatures as well as county and city jurisdictions have
conditioned eligibility for certain government programs and benefits on SSS registration.145
Failing to register for the Selective Service, or knowingly counseling, aiding, or abetting another
to fail to comply with the MSSA, is considered a felony. Those who fail to register may have their
names forwarded to the DOJ. In FY2018, 112,051 names and addresses of suspected violators
were provided to DOJ.146 In practice, there have been no criminal prosecutions for failing to
register since January 1986. At that time the SSS reported a total of 20 indictments with 14
convictions.147
Other penalties adversely affect the population required to register. For example, California
estimated that between 2007 and 2014, young men in that state who failed to register were denied
access to more than $99 million in federal and state financial aid and job training benefits.148
There is some relief from penalties for those who fail to register. The MSSA establishes a statute
of limitations on criminal prosecutions for evading registration to five years after a fraudulent
registration or failure to register, whichever is first.149 Also, individuals may not be denied federal
benefits for failing to register if
 the requirement to register has terminated or become inapplicable to the person;
and
 the person shows by a preponderance of the evidence that the failure of the
person to register was not a knowing and willful failure to register.150
Individuals who unknowingly fail to register may ask for reconsideration from the official
handling their case and may be required to submit evidence that they were unaware of their
requirement to register.

that the applicant is not eligible for naturalization, because he has failed to establish his willingness to bear arms when
required and his disposition to the good order and happiness of the United States.”
143 Failure to obey a federal law could raise a security concern and may be disqualifying in accordance with
Adjudicative Guidelines for Determining Eligibility for Access to Classified Information, Guideline J: Criminal
Conduct, at http://www.state.gov/m/ds/clearances/60321.htm#j.
144 50 U.S.C. §3811(f)(1) and C.F.R. §668.37. The FAFSA Simplification Act enacted in December 2020 as part of
Title VII, Section 702 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (P.L. 116-260), includes a provision amending the
Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. §1087kk). This provision adds Section 483(s) which allows those who have
not registered for the Selective Service to be eligible for federal student aid. The law directs ED to implement these
provisions no later than July 1, 2023, but gives the agency the authority to implement them earlier.
145 For a full list of provisions by States, Territories, and the District of Columbia, see https://www.sss.gov/
Registration/State-Commonwealth-Legislation/Other-Legislations.
146 Selective Service System, Annual Report to the Congress of the United States: Fiscal Year 2018, Office of Public
and Intergovernmental Affairs, 2018, p. 7. The numbers of referrals to DOJ were not reported in the FY2019 or
FY2020 reports.
147 Selective Service System, Semiannual Report of the Director of Selective Service, October 1, 1986-March 31, 1987.
148 Tina Griego, "America May Never Have a Draft Again. But We’re Still Punishing Low-Income Men for not
Registering," Washington Post, October 16, 2014.
149 50 U.S.C. §3811(d).
150 50 U.S.C. §3811(g).
Congressional Research Service

25

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

Selective Service System Agency Overview
The SSS is an independent federal agency within the executive branch with headquarters located
in Arlington, VA. It is not part of the Department of Defense. The agency is currently maintained
as an active standby organization, which means that most of its functions are administrative. The
statutory missions of the SSS are to maintain
 a complete registration and classification structure capable of immediate
operation in the event of a national emergency (including a structure for
registration and classification of persons qualified for practice or employment in
a health care occupation essential to the maintenance of the Armed Forces), and
 personnel adequate to reinstitute immediately the full operation of the System,
including military reservists who are trained to operate such System and who can
be ordered to active duty for such purpose in the event of a national
emergency.151
If the SSS were activated with the authority to induct individuals, the agency would be
responsible for (1) holding a national draft lottery, (2) contacting registrants who are selected via
the lottery, (3) arranging transportation for selectees to Military Entrance Processing Stations
(MEPS) for testing and evaluation of fitness to serve, and (4) activating a classification structure
that would include area offices, local offices, and appeal boards.152 Local boards would also
evaluate claims for exemption, postponement, or deferments. Those classified as conscientious
objectors would be required to serve in a noncombatant or nonmilitary capacity. For those
permitted to serve in a nonmilitary capacity, the SSS would be responsible for placing these
“alternative service workers” with alternate employers and tracking completion of 24 months of
their required service.

151 50 U.S.C. §3809(h).
152 Currently new voluntary recruits do a majority of their entry processing and testing at regional MEPS. Selective
Service System, Congressional Budget Justification, FY2016, Arlington, VA.
Congressional Research Service

26

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

Categories for Exemption or Deferment Under Current SSS Operating
Procedures

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. Depending upon the nature of his beliefs, a
conscientious objector serves either in a noncombatant capacity in the Armed Forces or in a civilian job
contributing to the national interest.

Surviving sons or brothers in a family where the parent or sibling died as a result of U.S. military service, or is
in a captured or missing in action status, are exempt from service in peacetime.

Hardship deferments are available for men whose induction would result in hardship to persons who depend
upon them for support.

Members of Reserve components (including the National Guard and advanced level Reserve Officers’
Training Corps cadets who have already signed a Reserve contract) are eligible for a separate classification
and perform their military service in the National Guard or the Reserves.

Ministers are exempted from service.

Ministerial students are deferred from service until they complete their studies.

Certain elected officials are exempt from service as long as they continue to hold office.

Veterans generally are exempt from service in peacetime.

Immigrants and dual nationals in some cases may be exempt from U.S. military service depending upon their
place of residence and country of citizenship.
Source: Selective Service System.
Workforce and Organization
The agency’s workforce is comprised of full-time career employees, part-time military and
civilian personnel, and approximately 11,000 part-time civilian volunteers.153 In FY2020, the
agency had 124 full-time equivalent civilian positions for administration and operations across
agency headquarters, the Data Management Center, and three regional headquarters offices.154
Part-time employees include 56 State Directors representing the 50 states, four territories, the
District of Columbia, and New York City. The median General Schedule (GS) grade for the
agency is GS-11.155
The SSS maintains a list of unpaid volunteers who serve as local, district, and national appeal
board members who could be activated to help decide the classification status of men seeking
exemptions or deferments in the case of a draft. The SSS also has positions for 175 part-time
Reserve Forces Officers (RFOs) representing all branches of the Armed Forces.156 RFO duties
include interviewing Selective Service board member candidates, training board members,
participating in readiness exercises, supporting the registration public awareness effort, and
maintaining space, equipment, and supplies.157

153 Selective Service System, Annual Report to the Congress of the United States: Fiscal Year 2020, Office of Public
and Intergovernmental Affairs, 2019, p. 3.
154 Ibid, p. 3. Region I is Headquartered in Chicago, Illinois; region II is in Dobbins ARB—Air Reserve Base, Marietta,
Georgia; and region III is in Denver, Colorado.
155 Selective Service System, Congressional Budget Justification, FY2021,Arlington, VA, p. 17.
156 Ibid. Reserve Force Officers (RFOs) are maintained at a maximum level of 175, which includes 150 funded and 25
unfunded.
157 For more information see https://www.sss.gov/About/Agency-Structure/Reserve-Forces-Officers.
Congressional Research Service

27

link to page 32 The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

Funding
Congress appropriates funds for the SSS through the Financial Services and General Government
Appropriations Act.158 For FY2021, Congress appropriated $26 million, a decrease from the
FY2020 appropriation of $27.1 million. The budget request for FY2022 is $27.6 million.159 In
FY1977-FY1979, while the SSS was in “deep standby” mode, funding for the agency was
between $6 million and $8 million in then-year dollars (approximately $26-$34 million in 2020
dollars).160
Currently, nearly 60% of the agency’s annual budget goes to personnel costs, including civilian
pay and benefits and Military Reserve Officer support (see Table 3). 161
Table 3. Selective Service Agency Budget
FY2020
Function
Amount
Civilian Pay & Benefits
$13,933,940
Military Reserve Officer Support Services
$1,272,189
Agency Services (Government & Commercial)
$6,272,911
IT Software & Equipment
$1,750,601
GSA Occupancy Agreement (OA), Other Rent, Lease, Storage,
$1,113,572
and Maintenance
Postage & Express Courier Services
$738,832
Communications Services, Utilities, and Facilities Operations
$1,324,174
Printing & Reproduction
$358,456
General Supplies and Furniture
$186,098
Training, Travel, and Transportation of Personnel
$112,288
Strategic Initiatives
$36,939
Total
$27,100,000
Source: Selective Service System, Annual Report to the Congress of the United States: Fiscal Year 2020, Office of
Public and Intergovernmental Affairs, p. 13.
Data-Sharing and Data Management
The agency maintains data for registrants until their 85th birthday at the Data Management Center
in Palatine, IL; the center is authorized 48 full-time employees.162 The purpose of retaining the
data for this length of time is to enable SSS to verify eligibility for registered males who apply for

158 See CRS Report R45295, Financial Services and General Government (FSGG) FY2019 Appropriations: Overview,
by Baird Webel.
159 Selective Service System, FY2022 Congressional Budget Justification, May 2021, Arlington, VA. Available at
https://www.sss.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/FY-2022-Congressional-Budget-Justification-Selective-Service-
System.pdf
160 Office of Management and Budget, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Years 1974 -1979.
161 The RFOs receive their drill pay from DOD and then DOD is reimbursed by the SSS.
162 https://www.sss.gov/About/Agency-Structure.
Congressional Research Service

28

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

certain government employment or benefits. According to the SSS, this database has over 80
million records and grows by 2 million to 2.5 million records per year. 163 The information held in
this database includes registrants’ full name, date of birth, street address, city, state, zip code, and
Social Security number.164 In FY2018, recognizing the need for digital and mobile information,
the SSS started collecting email addresses and phone numbers.165 The SSS also maintains a
“Suspected Violator Inventory System,” which includes data on non-registrants that the SSS has
received through data-sharing agreements.166 The SSS uses information on this list to reach out to
individuals and remind them of their obligation to register.
Most of the registration and data-sharing is automated. 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, USCIS, DOD, and the Alaska Permanent
Fund. Information received from these agencies by the SSS is matched with existing data and if
no record exists, one is created.
On a monthly basis, SSS provides the Joint Advertising and Market Research Studies (JAMRS,
part of DOD) new registrant names, addresses, and date of birth, and a file of individuals
identified as deceased.167 These data are kept for three years by JAMRS and are used by DOD for
recruiting purposes. Yearly, SSS provides the names, addresses, and Social Security numbers of
individuals ages 18 through 25 to the U.S. Census Bureau for its intercensal estimate program.
The Census Bureau keeps these data for two years. Annually, the SSS also sends DOJ a list of
individuals who are required to register, but have failed to do so.168
Men are required to update the Selective Service within 10 days when their address changes until
January 1 of the year that they turn 26 years old. Those who register at 18 years old are likely to
move at least once, if not a number of times, before their 26th birthday. For example, a college-
bound 18-year-old may move away from their parents’ home to university housing, then into an
off-campus apartment, and into a new home after graduation. The SSS updates addresses in its
database using information from other agencies and self-reported information from individuals.
What are Some Options for the Future of the
Selective Service System?
Although Congress has amended the MSSA a number of times, some of its main tenets—the
preservation of a peacetime selective service agency and a registration requirement—have
remained much the same since the mid-20th century. The future of the Selective Service System is
a concern for many in Congress. The registration requirements and associated penalties affect
young men in every congressional district.

163 Selective Service System, Congressional Budget Justification, FY2022, Arlington, VA, p. 1.
164 An amendment to the MSSA by P.L. 97-86 authorized SSS to require registrants to furnish their Social Security
account number.
165 Selective Service System, Annual Report to the Congress of the United States: Fiscal Year 2019, Office of Public
and Intergovernmental Affairs, 2019.
166 Laura Seago, Automatic Registration in the United States: The Selective Service Example, Brennan Center for
Justice, New York University School of Law, 2009, p. 9.
167 Information provided by the Selective Service System to CRS.
168 Information provided by the Selective Service System to CRS.
Congressional Research Service

29

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

Some see the preservation of the SSS as an important component of national security and
emergency preparedness. Others suggest the MSSA is no longer necessary and should be
repealed. Still others have suggested amendments to the MSSA to address issues of equity,
efficiency, and cost.
Arguments For and Against Repeal of MSSA
Some form of selective service legislation has been in effect almost continuously since 1940.
Repealing the MSSA and associated statute would dismantle the SSS agency infrastructure and
would remove the registration requirement with its associated penalties. Efforts to repeal the
Selective Service Act have been repeatedly introduced in Congress, and repeal is popular among
certain advocacy groups and defense scholars.169
Those who would like to repeal the MSSA and disband the SSS question whether a draft
mechanism is still necessary in the modern-day context. A return to the draft has been unpopular
with a majority of the American public.170 Some argue that there is a low likelihood of the draft
ever being reinstated. Even in the face of nearly two decades of conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan,
DOD maintained its ability to recruit and retain a professional volunteer force without resorting to
conscription. The nature of warfare has shifted in such a way that the United States may not need
to mobilize manpower at the rates seen in the 20th century. Even if such high mobilization rates
were needed, some question whether the Armed Forces would have the capacity and
infrastructure to rapidly absorb the large numbers of untrained personnel that a draft would
provide.171 DOD has reported that the Military Entry Processing Command can process
approximately 18,000 registrants per day. These new accessions would then be sent to training
centers/duty stations as identified by the Office of the Secretary of Defense.172
Some analysts have suggested that a draft, if implemented, would be an inefficient use of labor, as
it would “indiscriminately compel employment in the military regardless of an individual’s skills
where that individual could have much greater value to our society elsewhere.”173 Others,
including civil rights advocacy groups, contend that the registration requirement and conscription
are an invasion of civil liberty.
Those who advocate for maintaining the MSSA but suspending of all SSS activity contend that
the SSS infrastructure and registrant databases could be reconstructed in due time if the need
arose.174 In the short term, additional manpower needs might be augmented by Delayed Entry
Program (DEP) participants, non-prior service reservists awaiting training, and other inactive

169 See for example, S. 3041 (114th Congress) Muhammad Ali Voluntary Service Act, and H.R. 4523 (114th Congress)
To repeal the Military Selective Service Act, and thereby terminate the registration requirements of such Act and
eliminate civilian local boards, civilian appeal boards, and similar local agencies of the Selective Service System.
170 2013 polling data suggest that 65% of Americans are opposed to reinstating the draft (with 28% in favor and 8%
don’t know). Quinnipiac University Poll, February 7, 2013. Prior polls in the past 2 decades have also shown similar or
higher rates of opposition, see Gallup, Military and National Defense, at https://news.gallup.com/poll/1666/military-
national-defense.aspx.
171 LA Times Editorial Board, "Draft registry for women? How about for no one?" Los Angeles Times, February 16,
2016.
172 Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, Report on the Purpose and Utility of a
Registration System for Military Selective Service, July 2017, p. 24.
173 Benjamin W. Powell, Time to Abolish Selective Service, Independent Institute, January 7, 2016.
174 Bernard Rostker, “What to Do with the Selective Service System? Historical Lessons and Future Posture,” Santa
Monica, RAND Corporation, 2018, http://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE197.html.
Congressional Research Service

30

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

reserve manpower.175 A reauthorization of the draft might also encourage volunteerism, as
choosing a branch of service and occupational specialty might be more preferable to the
possibility of being drafted and assigned a branch and occupation. This might have the potential
to provide adequate volunteer manpower until the SSS mechanisms could be fully re-established.
Others are skeptical that a post-mobilization registration system, including the administrative
infrastructure to support a draft, could be quickly established in a time of national crisis.176
Proponents of maintaining the SSS and registration requirement often cite a few key arguments.
First, at approximately $26 million per year, some have argued that it provides a “low-cost
insurance policy” against potential future threats that may require national mobilization beyond
what could be supported by the all-volunteer force. Second, adversaries of the United States could
see the disbanding of the SSS as a potential weakness, thus emboldening existing or potential
enemies. Third, the registration requirement is important to maintain connections between the all-
volunteer force and civil society by creating an awareness of the military and the duty to serve in
time of crisis among the nation’s youth.
The National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service (henceforth “the 2020
Commission), found little evidence that the maintenance of the SSS either deters potential
adversaries or helps forge connections between American citizens and the military. However, the
2020 Commission recommended maintaining the SSS and mandatory registration as a draft
contingency mechanism, stating
After extensive review, the Commission reaffirms the need to maintain a contingency for
mandatory military service in order to draw on the talents, skills, and abilities of Americans
in the event of a national emergency, and to clarify the purpose of that system in law. The
Selective Service is an essential component of the Nation's military preparedness.177
Other Legislative Options and Considerations
Some of the options for amending the MSSA include the following:
 Repealing the registration requirement (with or without maintaining the SSS as
an agency),
 Transferring SSS functions to an existing federal agency,
 Removing or modifying penalties for failure to register,
 Requiring women to register,
 Enhancing SSS data collection for the acquisition of critical skills, and
 Strengthening ability to respond to a national mobilization.

175 Doug Bandow, Draft Registration: It's Time to Repeal Carter's Final Legacy, Cato Institute, Policy Analysis No.
86, May 7, 1987, http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa086.html. Inactive reserve strength would include Individual Ready
Reserves, Standby Reserves, and Retired Reserves. The Individual Ready Reserve is composed of former active duty
and reserve military personnel and is authorized under Chapter 1005 of Title 10 United States Code.
176 National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service, Inspired to Serve, Final Report, March 2020.
177 Dr. Kori Schake, Deputy Director General, International Institute for Strategic Studies, Statement for the Record to
the National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service, May 15, 2019,
https://www.inspire2serve.gov/_api/files/276.
Congressional Research Service

31

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

Repealing the Peacetime Registration Requirement
Congress could repeal the registration requirement and terminate the existing penalties for failing
to register.178 Removing the registration requirement and the need to verify registration would
reduce the activities of the SSS. In this instance, the agency’s functions would likely be limited to
historical record preservation and maintenance of standby plans and volunteer rolls.
Some have proposed that if registrant data were needed for a future draft, they might be acquired
through existing federal or state government databases. The current SSS database relies heavily
on information collected by other federal and state entities for initial inputs, updates, and
verification of registrants’ address information. However, this data sharing is enabled by existing
statutes and agency agreements that if repealed or allowed to lapse might require time and effort
to reconstitute. The use of existing government or even commercial databases to develop a list of
draft-eligible youth also raises concerns about a fair and equitable draft, as these lists might also
exclude some draft-eligible individuals.179
In the case of a national emergency, Congress could enact a new statutory requirement for draft
registration, and reconstitute the SSS (if it had been dissolved). A 1997 GAO study found that the
time needed to raise the necessary infrastructure might be insufficient to respond to urgent DOD
requirements.180 There may be other challenges in enforcing a new registration requirement in a
time of national need. Currently, compliance rates for registration are relatively high, but the
probability of implementing a draft is considered to be low. If the government tried to reintroduce
a registration requirement during a time when conscription were more likely, compliance rates
could fall and it might be more difficult to build up a database of eligible individuals. On the
other hand, when the registration requirement was reinstated in 1980, the SSS reported 95%
compliance rates within four months.181
The 2020 Commission recommend maintaining the pre-mobilization registration system and the
SSS infrastructure, based on estimates that it would take 830 to 920 days to bring the SSS out of
standby mode and deliver the first inductees.182 If the SSS was maintained and only the
registration requirement was repealed, the SSS estimates it would take one year from
congressional authorization to deliver the first inductee.183
Transferring SSS Functions to an Existing Federal Agency
Current law states, “the Selective Service System should remain administratively independent of
any other agency, including the Department of Defense.”184 Nevertheless, Congress could amend
the MSSA to transfer its functions to an existing federal agency. Such a transfer might take into

178 50 U.S.C. §3802 and 50 U.S.C. §3811.
179 In 1978 the Congressional Budget Office proposed automatic registration of eligible persons by merging existing
data on file with the Social Security System and Internal Revenue Service (IRS).179 The report’s authors suggested,
however, that such a list might miss as many as 40% of eligible registrants and thus raise issues of inequity. IRS
officials were also concerned that such an approach would also raise the rates of tax evasion from those seeking to
avoid draft registration.
180 U.S. General Accounting Office, Selective Service: Cost and Implications of Two Alternatives to the Present System,
NSAID-97-225, September 1997.
181 Selective Service System, Semiannual Report of the Director of Selective Service, Together with A Report on the
1980 National Selective Service Registration, January 30, 1981, 1983, Table 4, p. 13.
182 National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service, Inspired to Serve, Final Report, March 2020.
183 Ibid.
184 50 U.S.C. §3801(f).
Congressional Research Service

32

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

account not only the SSS’s value as a unique data center, but also the staff who comprise the
agency at many levels, who would be needed in case of an actual draft.
As described previously, this staffing includes regional directors and a pool of civilian volunteers
that would serve on local draft boards. This responsibility for maintaining volunteer rolls and
training could also be transferred to an existing federal agency, potentially the Department of
Defense, and the capability could be augmented with military reserve manpower (as is currently
done). The statutory independence of the SSS with respect to DOD and the presence of local
civilian boards have historically been viewed as important to the public’s perception of a fair and
equitable draft. To address this concern, some have proposed that administrative responsibilities
could be transferred to DOD while the draft is inactive with the option of transferring all
functions back to an independent agency if draft authority were reinstated.185
Another option might be to transfer the agency and/or its functions to the Department of
Homeland Security. There are potential synergies between the SSS and other DHS agencies that
would play an active role in a time of national emergency.186 At least one agency under DHS
(USCIS) already has a role in data sharing with the SSS.187
Some suggest that suspension or transfer of SSS operations could deliver some federal budget
savings. In 2012, as mandated by Congress, the GAO compared the potential costs and savings of
operating in a “deep standby” mode versus active registration.188 According to the report, the SSS
estimated that operating in a deep standby mode would provide approximately $5 million in
savings in the first year with recurring savings of $6.6 million annually. This would be a
reduction of about 25% of the current budget. The transfer of SSS functions to an existing agency
might have some initial implementation costs but could potentially reduce some of the overhead
costs of maintaining an independent agency.189
Amending or Repealing the Penalties for Failing to Register
Some argue that Congress should amend the MSSA and associated statute to remove penalties for
failing to register, particularly since only men are subject to the requirements. They argue that
ineligibility for federal benefits is most harmful to those with fewer financial resources who also
might be least aware of their obligation to register. Nevertheless, weakening or removing
penalties could affect registration compliance rates.
Alternatively, Congress could amend the penalties to limit the amount of time that one is
ineligible for federal benefits following failure to register. For example, under current law, the
statute of limitations for criminal penalties is five years following the individual’s 26th birthday or

185 In 1975, the Office of Management and Budget proposed this possibility for the agency in a “deep standby” mode.
James T. Lynn, The Selective Service System: Draft of 10/17/75, Washington, DC: Office of Management and Budget,
1975.
186 Agencies under DHS include the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), U.S. Coast Guard. U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Secret Service, and the
Transportation Security Administration.
187 USCIS assists with the registration process by transmitting the appropriate data to the Selective Service System
(SSS) for male applicants between the ages of 18 and 26 who apply for adjustment of status. See USCIS Policy
Manual, Chapter 7, at https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-12-part-d-chapter-7.
188 P.L. 112-81. U.S. Government Accountability Office, DOD Should Reevaluate Requirements for the Selective
Service System, GAO-12-623, June 2012.
189 U.S. Government Accountability Office, DOD Should Reevaluate Requirements for the Selective Service System,
GAO-12-623, June 2012.
Congressional Research Service

33

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

fraudulent registration. The MSSA could be amended to sunset ineligibility after a certain time
period, or to reinstate eligibility for federal benefits through some other form of public service.
The 2020 Commission recommended a 30-day grace period for an individual to register
following the denial of a federal benefit, regardless of age at the time of applying for the
benefit.190
Changing Registration Requirements to Include Women
Women in the United States have never been required to register for the draft; however, DOD
policy changes in 2015 that opened all military occupational specialties (MOSs) including ground
combat positions to women have called into question the Selective Service exemption for
women.191 Public opinion on this issue is split, with several polls indicating that approximately
50% of Americans support including women, with 35%-46% opposed.192 Some have argued that
in the case of national need, it would be unwise to exclude 50% of the population from draft
eligibility, as drawing from a broader pool of draftees could help meet both quantity and quality
targets.
In a February 2019 decision, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas granted a
summary judgment declaring the male-only registration requirement was unconstitutional;
however, the court did not grant injunctive relief blocking the government’s current male-only
registration policy because the plaintiffs’ summary judgment motion seeking declaratory relief
did not request it.193 As such, the male-only registration policy remains in place. The plaintiffs in
this case, the National Coalition for Men and two men of registration age, argue that requiring
only men to register constitutes sex discrimination in violation of the Fifth Amendment’s equal
protection clause.194 The February 2019 decision was appealed in the United States Court of
Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and oral arguments were held on March 3, 2020.195 The federal
government argued that the court should wait to make a decision until the results of the National
Commission on Military National and Public Service study were released.196 In June 2021, the
Supreme Court declined to consider the case, with one Justice noting that Congress is currently
considering legislation that would require women to register and noting the courts “longstanding
deference to Congress on matters of national defense and military affairs.197

190 National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service, Inspired to Serve, Final Report, March 2020.
191 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Armed Services, Implementation of the Decision to Open All Ground Combat
Units to Women, 114th Cong., 2nd sess., February 2, 2016 (Washington: GPO, 2016). For more information on the
expansion of combat roles to woman, see CRS Report R42075, Women in Combat: Issues for Congress, by Kristy N.
Kamarck and CRS Report R44321, Diversity, Inclusion, and Equal Opportunity in the Armed Services: Background
and Issues for Congress, by Kristy N. Kamarck.
192 Polling results from five recent polls as presented in National Commission on Military, National, and Public
Service, Inspired to Serve, Final Report, March 2020, Figure 13, https://inspire2serve.gov/reports/final-report.
193 National Coalition for Men, et al. v. Selective Service System, (U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas,
Houston Division, 2019).
194 Ibid.
195 Patricia Kime, "Appeals court weighs constitutionality of excluding women from the draft," MilitaryTimes, March
3, 2020.
196 Ibid.
197 Statement of Sotomayor, J, Supreme Court of the United States, National Coalition of Men et al. v. Selective Service
System et al., on a petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for Fifth Circuit, No. 20-928,
June 7, 2021.
Congressional Research Service

34

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

Some women have also pushed for female registration, arguing 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 Selective Service.198 The 2020 Commission
heard from some current female servicemembers that “disparate treatment with respect to
registration was yet another way in which the Government signaled that their contributions and
sacrifices were not as valued as those of their male colleagues.”199
Others believe that equal access to combat jobs should oblige women to take equal responsibility
for registering for Selective Service and potential assignments to combat roles should the draft be
reinstated.200 Still others suggest that women should be obliged to register but should not be
forced into combat roles in the occasion of a draft.201 Any exemptions for women would raise
fairness concerns for men, who would not have the same opportunities to opt out of combat
assignments. Making the choice not to serve in combat available to both men and women might
make it difficult for the services to function, especially in the event of war or national emergency.
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. They argue that the average woman
does not have the same physical capabilities as the average man and thus would have higher rates
of injury and a lower probability of survival if forced to serve in direct ground combat roles.202
Physiological studies have found that the average man has greater muscle mass, upper- and
lower-body strength, and speed than the average women.203 Military studies have also found
higher injury rates among women – particularly when engaging in heavy load-bearing
activities.204 Other studies have suggested that physiological differences associated with
metabolic rates may give women an advantage in endurance activities.205 Opponents of drafting
women have also contended that it would be militarily inefficient to draft thousands of women
when only a small percentage would be physically qualified to serve in direct ground combat
roles.206
Some have countered that the physical standards for assignment to combat roles in the AVF are
tied to combat tasks, gender-neutral, and unlikely to be lowered in the instance of draft
mobilization, ensuring that the cadre of men and women would be assigned to those roles at rates
proportional to their ability to meet those physical standards.207 Moreover, physical standards are

198 In July 2015 a teenage girl from New Jersey brought a federal class action suit against the Selective Service
claiming the refusal to allow women to register is discriminatory now that women are eligible for combat roles.
199 National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service, Inspired to Serve, Final Report, March 2020,
https://inspire2serve.gov/reports/final-report.
200 David Barno and Nora Bensahel, "Now Women Should Register for the Draft," Time, December 7, 2015.
201 Nicole Lafond, "Poll: Most Women Believe They Should Not Be Forced Into Combat," The Daily Caller, February
7, 2013.
202 June Eden, "Thanks, Ashton - Women Now Subject to Involuntary Assignment to Combat Units, Selective Service,"
Breitbart Texas, December 10, 2015.
203 Ian Janssen et al., "Skeletal muscle mass and distribution in 468 men and women aged 18–88 yr," Journal of
Applied Physiology, July 1, 2000.
204 Dan Lamothe, "Marine experiment finds women get injured more frequently, shoot less accurately than men,"
Washington Post, September 10, 2015.
205 S.L. Carter, C. Rennie, and M.A. Tarnopolsky, "Substrate utilization during endurance exercise in men and women
after endurance training," American Journal of Physiology; Endocrinology and Metabolism, June 2001. Simon
Usborne, "Why women are outperforming men at the extremes of endurance," Financial Times, January 22, 2019.
206 Charlie Dunlap, "Register Women for the Draft? Not So Fast," Lawfire, January 30, 2016.
207 When registering women for the draft was considered in the early 1980s, some raised equity concerns about draft
calls since combat positions were closed to women, therefore, men and women would not likely be drafted in equal
Congressional Research Service

35

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

not the only standards to be met for service in the Armed Forces. Prospective recruits must also
meet certain educational, aptitude, and medical standards and there are restrictions on prior drug
use or criminal offenses.208 The 2020 Commission noted that while the number of young people
eligible for military service under current standards has been shrinking, data from DOD indicate
that young women are equally as likely to qualify for service under these standards as men.209
In addition, the nature of warfare has changed in such a way that units nominally designated as
“noncombat” have nevertheless been engaged by enemy forces – blurring the distinction between
combat and noncombat troops.210 At the same time, future wars may have requirements for other
skills in noncombat fields where the percentage of individuals qualified would not be as variable
by gender. Historically, conscription has been used to fill both combat and noncombat roles, and
nearly 80% of today’s military specialties are designated as non-combat.211
Others who are opposed to the potential draft of women believe that women hold a special and
unique position in society due to their roles as wives, mothers, caregivers, and nurturers.212 As
stated in the 2020 Commission report,
For some, women's unique biological distinction—their ability to conceive and bear
children—is an immutable difference that justifies differential treatment and raises the
concern that military service may adversely affect the fertility of female service members.
These individuals argue that service through a draft would interfere with or deny many
women the ability to embrace the vocation of motherhood.213
Certain religious organizations believe it is wrong for women to serve in combat roles, or for the
government to coerce women into military service.214 In addition, some polling data suggest that
if women were required to register for the draft, it would significantly increase public opposition
to reinstating the draft and could affect public support for engaging in any conflict that has the
potential to escalate beyond the capability of the all-volunteer force.215 A requirement for young

numbers. Proponents of registering women asserted that conscription would be based on military personnel needs and
men and women would serve “in proportion to the ability of the Armed Forces to use them effectively.” U.S. Congress,
House Committee on Armed Services, Presidential Recommendations for Selective Service Reform, committee print,
96th Cong., 2nd sess., February 11, 1980 (Washington: GPO, 1980). Micah Ables, Women Aren't the Problem,
Standards Are, Modern War Institute, February 5, 2019, https://mwi.usma.edu/women-arent-problem-standards/.
208 For more on enlistment standards, see CRS Report WPD00017, Understanding Constituent Issues: Enlisting in the
Armed Forces, by Lawrence Kapp and Alan Ott.
209 National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service, Inspired to Serve, Final Report, March 2020,
https://inspire2serve.gov/reports/final-report, p. 115.
210 For example, in 2005 the Army started moving towards a “Modular Redesign” for rotation, training, and readiness
reasons. Under this concept, the Brigade Combat Teams (BCTs) served as the basic large tactical combat unit of the
Army. These BCTs were supported by Multi-Functional Support Brigades. These support brigades were often
collocated with the BCTs and included noncombat personnel, many of whom were women. As a consequence, non-
combat designated personnel were often exposed to combat action.
211 National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service, Inspired to Serve, Final Report, March 2020,
https://inspire2serve.gov/reports/final-report, p. 116.
212 Ibid, p. 120.
213 Ibid.
214 For example, the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) issued a resolution on the registration requirement for women
that argues, “requiring women to register for the Selective Service alongside men would be to treat men and women
interchangeably and to deny male and female differences clearly revealed in Scripture and in nature […] the
messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Birmingham, Alabama, June 11–12, 2019, strongly urge the
President and Congress not to expand the Selective Service to include women.” SBC Annual Meeting Resolutions, at
http://www.sbcannualmeeting.net/sbc19/resolutions#2309.
215 Some polling data suggest that if the military draft was reinstated, 52% of Americans would be in favor of drafting
Congressional Research Service

36

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

women to register may have some benefits for DOD in terms of military recruiting. The address
data collected by the Selective Service System and shared with DOD currently enhances
recruiters’ ability to identify potential enlistees and distribute marketing materials to registered
young men by mail. DOD estimates that marketing materials included with SSS registration
confirmation mailing—or joint leads—generate between 75,000-80,000 male recruiting prospects
annually.216 DOD, through JAMRS, purchases similar databases for information about enlistment-
eligible women. Although most registrations are now completed automatically through other
interactions with the federal or state government, some contend that the very act of registering
would make young women more aware of their citizenship duties, thus broadening the percentage
of qualified women considering a career in the military.
In March 2020, the National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service recommended
extending draft registration to women, stating
Doing so promotes the national security of the United States by allowing the President to
leverage the full range of talent and skills available during a national mobilization. It also
reaffirms the Nation's fundamental belief in a common defense, and signals that both men
and women are valued for their contributions in defending the Nation. The current disparate
treatment of women unacceptably excludes women from a fundamental civic obligation
and reinforces gender stereotypes about the role of women, undermining national
security.217
Including women in the registration process may require some additional budget resources for the
SSS due to increased administrative processing and public awareness needs. Currently there are
about 11 million women ages 18-26 who would be eligible to register under the statutory age
requirement.218 The SSS has estimated that to expand registration requirements for women it
would need an additional $16 million in funding for the first year of registering women and a
total of $59 million over a 5-year period to implement the policy change.219
Enhanced SSS Data Collection for the Acquisition of Critical Skills
As previously discussed, some have suggested that the future threats that the United States may
face may require rapid mobilization of those with specialized skills and experience (e.g., cyber,

women as well as men. Thirty six percent of men and 48% of women were opposed to drafting women. Quinnipiac
University Poll, February 7, 2013. Public opinion on this matter has remained about the same since 1980, when draft
registration requirements were reinstated. At that time, 50% of Americans were in favor of requiring women to
participate in a draft should it become necessary. A 2011 study reported survey results that found that instituting a draft
significantly reduced the public's support for war: “moving from an all-volunteer to a conscript army decreases support
by 17% (from 54% to 37%).” Horowitz, Michael C. and Matthew S. Levendusky, "Drafting Support for War:
Conscription and Mass," The Journal of Politics, vol. 73, no. 2 (April 2011).
216 Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, Report on the Purpose and Utility of a
Registration System for Military Selective Service, July 2017, p. 11.
217 National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service, Inspired to Serve, Final Report, March 2020,
https://inspire2serve.gov/reports/final-report, p. 115.
218 Based on 2010 U.S. Census figures and projections.
219 National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service, Inspired to Serve, Final Report, March 2020,
https://inspire2serve.gov/reports/final-report. Prior estimates by the SSS were $8.5 million additional funds in the first
year and slightly less in the following years. In the first year the SSS would need to conduct a “catch-up” registration
for the entire 18 to 26 year old cohort, while in subsequent years the bulk of the new registrations would be those
turning 18 in that year. Schmidt, Michael S., "Draft Registration for Women Would Stir a Sleepy Government
Agency," February 7, 2016.
Congressional Research Service

37

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

space, health care).220 The MSSA appears to acknowledge that a national mobilization may
require other critical manpower beyond combat troops, stating,
The Congress further declares that adequate provision for national security requires
maximum effort in the fields of scientific research and development, and the fullest
possible utilization of the Nation's technological, scientific, and other critical manpower
resources.221
One option for Congress would be to require the SSS to implement an enhanced registration
system that includes listing certain degrees, licenses, or certifications. This could potentially
allow rapid acquisition of personnel with necessary expertise through a targeted draft. This type
of data collection could also be used to solicit volunteers with requisite expertise prior to
activating induction authorities. Should a draft ever be reinstated, available information on
individual qualifications could also shorten the timeline needed to train personnel in certain
specialties and could support more efficient alternative service placements for those who are
conscientious objectors. The challenges with pursuing this option for the SSS would be increased
administration costs to maintain, update, and enforce reporting for such a database. In addition,
some may oppose such a proposal due to fairness, privacy or civil liberty concerns.
Consideration of Skill-Matching in Conscription and Alternative Service;
Examples from Norway and Israel
One example of a modern-day peacetime registration and conscription system can be found in Norway. Norway
has an active duty military force size of 23,550 (out of a total population of about 5 mil ion).222 All Norwegian
citizens in a conscription cohort (men and women, age 17) are required to fil out an online questionnaire that
helps to determine their relevant skil s, eligibility for, and interest in military service. Based on the results of this
questionnaire, the armed forces calls in about 22,000 individuals to “Session Part 2” to determine fitness for
service through physical and psychological tests. Selection boards choose individuals for a mandatory 12-month
service obligation based on the armed forces’ needs for various skil s. About 9,000 total men and women are
eventually conscripted.223
Israeli is another country where all citizens (men and women) over the age of 18 are liable for conscription into
the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). Some exemptions are granted to Arab citizens of Israel, and to other citizens for
religious, physical or psychological reasons. There is an alternative service option called Sherut Leumi for a period
of 12 to 24 months.224 A number of women opt to serve in Sherut Leumi every year on religious grounds. Men
who request an exemption from the Army may do Sherut Leumi in lieu of military service. The options for service
under this program include work with hospitals, nursing homes, education, disadvantaged communities, immigrant
assistance, environmentalism, and other non-profit organizations. Placement organizations conduct interviews to
match youth with jobs based on individual skil s and interests.
The SSS currently has a standby plan, the Health Care Professional Delivery System (HCPDS),
that would initiate a post-mobilization draft of individuals with certain critical health specialties
in the case of a national emergency.225 The 2020 Commission noted that the HCPDS model would
be difficult to apply to other career fields, like cyber, that do not have clearly defined licensing

220 Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, Report on the Purpose and Utility of a
Registration System for Military Selective Service, July 2017, p. 25.
221 50 U.S.C. §3801(e).
222 To put this in context, the United States with a population of about 323 million has approximately 1.3 million active
duty servicemembers and recruits about 200,000 new active duty and reservists every year.
223 https://www.regjeringen.no/en/aktuelt/A-bill-introducing-compulsory-military-service-for-women/id763120/.
224 http://www.nbn.org.il/sherut-leumi-national-service/.
225 P.L. 100-180 §715, codified in 50 U.S.C. §3809.
Congressional Research Service

38

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

and certification requirements.226 The 2020 Commission offered some additional alternatives to
acquire critical skills including,
 Extending the upper age limit of registration to 35 years to capture those with
skills and experience that can only be gained through longer periods of education
and training;
 Creating a Critical Skills Individual Ready Reserve with incentives for non-prior
servicemembers and those separating from active or reserve service to remain
available in times of emergency; and
 Creating a national volunteer roster of skilled personnel who are willing to serve
in a national emergency.227
Regardless of the approach taken, the 2020 Commission also recommended that Congress require
the Secretary of Defense to generate and maintain a list of the type and number of currently
needed critically skilled personnel.
Strengthening Ability to Respond to a National Mobilization
The 2020 Commission made several other recommendations to modernize the SSS and to prepare
it for future national emergencies. One of these recommendations is to require regular, periodic
exercises of military draft mobilization processes. The commission noted that “since 1980, no
significant tests of the system have been undertaken to assess whether it [the SSS] can fulfill its
mission during an emergency.” In his testimony to the commission, the Director of the Selective
Service System noted that the agency recently conducted mobilization exercises for the first time
in several years. The commission’s draft legislative proposal would require such an exercise
every five years and would involve the SSS, the DHS, Department of Commerce, Department of
Labor, and other relevant interagency stakeholders.228
Another finding of the commission was that DOD is structurally unprepared “to efficiently and
effectively integrate conscripts into the total force” due to outdated personnel requirements and
timelines and a lack of central authority for managing such requirements. 229 The commission
recommended that Congress require the Secretary of Defense to designate an executive agent
within the Office of the Secretary of Defense to lead the DOD’s mobilization planning effort in
coordination with the SSS.

226 National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service, Inspired to Serve, Final Report, March 2020,
https://inspire2serve.gov/reports/final-report, pp. 103-104.
227 Ibid, p. 103.
228 National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service, Inspired to Serve, Final Report, Legislative Annex,
March 2020, https://inspire2serve.gov/sites/default/files/final-report/Legislative%20Annex.pdf. p. 172.
229 The commission found that personnel requirements and the timeline for inducting draftees in the event of an
emergency requiring mass mobilization had not been updated since 1994. National Commission on Military, National,
and Public Service, Inspired to Serve, Final Report, March 2020, https://inspire2serve.gov/reports/final-report.
Congressional Research Service

39

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

Appendix. Acronyms
Table A-1. Acronyms
Acronym
Description
AVF
All Volunteer Force
DHS
Department of Homeland Security
DOD
Department of Defense
DOJ
Department of Justice
ED
Department of Education
FY
Fiscal Year
GAO
General Accounting Office (pre-2004) or Government Accountability Office
HCPDS
Health Care Personnel Delivery System
GS
General Schedule
INS
Immigration and Nationalization Service
JAMRS
Joint Advertising Market Research and Studies
MEPS
Military Entry Processing Station
MOS
Military Occupational Specialty
MSSA
Military Selective Service Act
NDAA
National Defense Authorization Act
RFO
Reserve Force Office
SSS
Selective Service System
UMT
Universal Military Training
USCIS
United States Citizenship and Immigration Service
WWI
World War I
WWII
World War II

Author Information

Kristy N. Kamarck

Specialist in Military Manpower

Acknowledgments
Hibbah Kaileh assisted with the update to this report.
Congressional Research Service

40

The Selective Service System and Draft Registration: Issues for Congress

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service
R44452 · VERSION 15 · UPDATED
41

What did the Selective Service Act accomplish?

What was the Selective Service Act and how did it impact the war?

What was the purpose of the Selective Service Act quizlet?

What was the purpose of the selective?