The Democrat-controlled Senate is debating a version of the National Defense Authorization Act that includes a plan to register women for selective service…which would make them eligible for the draft. But Senators like Utah’s Mike Lee are standing up against it. Sen. Lee joins Glenn to explain what’s going on here. Why would the Democrats do this? Are they REALLY that woke? And does it have any chance at passing? Sen. Lee also responds to Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn’s statements that seem to support registering our daughters for selective service …
Transcript
Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors
GLENN: Chris Bedford has a great article out on the Blaze.com today. The Democrat's strange obsession with drafting your daughters.
I don't even understand. I mean, I understood this long ago. It was a way for Democrats, who didn't like war, to kind of, you know, ramp up the odds that we wouldn't go to war, if, you know, we had a draft.
And then we drafted your daughters. Nobody would want to go to war. I get that. Except, the Democrats are now the pro-war party.
So what the hell is happening?
And this just seems to have come out of nowhere. The most outspoken voices on this, are Chip Roy. And Mike Lee. And Mike is -- Mike is with us now. Can you please tell us what is happening with the draft stuff, Mike? Why is this happening?
MIKE: Yeah, look, the draft our daughters agenda has no place in our national defense. I think what they're trying to do. They're trying to engage in this, this sort of radical egalitarian exercise, where for aesthetics purposes, we're deciding to just show how woke we are. How open-minded we are.
GLENN: Do you really think that's -- do you really think that's motivating them at all?
MIKE: Well, yes. Because I can't fathom any other reasons why they would want to do it.
GLENN: Oh, my gosh.
MIKE: Look, you don't send women to fight. As long as able-bodied men exist and are available to fight, it's a fundamental notion. You don't even have to get to a moral question on this. It's a survival question. To draft our daughter's push, has been something that keeps getting recirculated every two years.
It's failed before every single time. Congress has rightly rejected previous attempts to draft women.
And they're quietly trying to slip it into the NDAA. The National Defense Authorization Act.
It's a bill that Congress passes once a year, to establish priorities for military. But people have already said no to it. It's an underhanded tactic, to include it in the base bill of the defense authorization act.
We should be putting policies like this, revolutionary policy into it.
It's very similar -- what they have been doing -- putting this together, and then ramming it through the Senate floor. Telling us we have no opportunity to amend it once it gets to the floor.
Someone will start sounding the alarm bells now, before it gets to the Senate floor or the House floor saying, absolutely not. The American people are going to take this.
GLENN: Okay. So you said it was a matter of survival. Explain that.
MIKE: Well, okay. So the purpose of having a military and therefore the purpose of having a draft, to staff the military, is to break things and kill people, just to put it very bluntly.
And so you don't -- you don't put women out there, as long as able-bodied men exist, and are able to fight.
For all sorts of reasons, including the fact that you -- you've got -- that men have this biological advantages in war, that need to be utilized. And it just sends all the wrong messages.
To our own people, and to whatever country or entity that we're fighting.
That our -- our able-bodied men are not all going to go out there.
We will send women instead.
Sends all the wrong messages. And that's not going to work well.
And so, every time people hear this, they need to reiterate their desire. If they feel the same way, they should repeat the phrase, don't draft our daughters. Just don't do it. That goes over pretty well. Once people hear a phrase like that, they tend to back away from it. And we shouldn't let them think that this is just a noncontroversial basic housekeeping. Just, you know, upbidding our legislative book to reflect modern realities. No. This is a fundamental shift, and one that we're not going to fall for.
GLENN: I mean, one I usually don't disagree with, Marsha Blackburn.
She said, this is about opportunity. It's not about combat. It's about their opportunity to serve.
Well, you know, I just found a picture of my grandparents. My grandfather is in a -- a military Marines uniform.
And my grandmother is in a Salvation Army uniform. And, you know, they -- women served all through wars in different capacities.
You can serve, it's just your body is not made for the -- the -- for a war. You can't drag your 200-pound companion off the battlefield if you're a 125-pound woman. You might be able to, but it's not going to be easy.
MIKE: No. Exactly right. And like you, I'm -- normally, I agree with Marsha Blackburn. I had not heard her say that. Let me just respond to this point.
As it's similar to the points that others have made on this front. This is not about opportunity. Opportunities already exist.
Opportunities already abound for people of both sexes to support the military. To be part of the military. To serve in combat or noncombat position, as they may choose.
This is not about that. This is about whether we will use the coercive force of the state. Have the coercive force of the United States government, in order to -- a point of a gun, order someone to take steps that could result in their being drafted. In their being brought up at the point of a gun. To a battlefield somewhere.
We shouldn't do that. We're not going to do that. This is not about opportunity. This is about right/wrong. This is about survival.
GLENN: Right. I am not for a draft in any case.
I think, you know, there's some people who disagree with me, who are in the military.
But I think there's a draft brings people in, that have no desire to be there. No desire to really fight.
I mean, unless we're in World War III, which we could be. Check the clock.
Unless we're in World War III. And the country needs, you know -- I think you always keep to a system, where it's a volunteer army for as long as you possibly can.
Because you get the people who are mentally and physically capable and ready to do it.
MIKE: You're exactly right, Glenn. But this is where you get tricky. Because you're right. And I think most people would agree with you, including most -- many of the people pushing this effort to require women to register with the selective service. What they would say here is, oh, this isn't about the draft. This is just about requiring them to register with the selective service.
Whether or not we actually have a draft. Well, Congress would have to authors that, before we could draft nip.
See, that's where you -- it's -- it's if you get hooked on that one.
You can say, oh, well, I'm not voting to draft women.
I'm just voting to require to register with the selective service. And then next time, if we are facing World War III or some other conflict.
For whatever reason, in order to survive. We've got conscript people involuntarily into the military. It will be automatic, because women will already be registered with the selective service. So that's the decision that we have to look to right now. We have to treat this as, do we want to draft women?
And I believe that among Eric and other people. The answer is a resounding no. And it should be.
GLENN: Let me ask you this.
My sister was freaking out a couple weeks ago.
Because they made it automatic now. We used to have register every mail registered.
When you turned 18. You register for selective service.
And it always freaks you out as a teenager. Wait a minute. I have to, what?
But, you know, we haven't seen a draft since the '60s or '70s. And it's just not -- it's just not in the cards.
But why are all these things changing right now?
What is going on, Mike?
Some people will look at this and go, they'll get us ready for war.
Are they? Or is this just -- what is this?
MIKE: Okay. So I think the best way to understand this. From years ago, at an event post by the Enterprise Institute, I heard someone give a speech about they talked about, ways in which we should be wary of a government, as it becomes more efficient, through technology and otherwise.
Government efficiency can be, sounds like, often is a good thing. He pointed out, that in some areas where civil liberties are confirmed, hyper efficient government poses a greater threat to our liberty. Perhaps this is one of them.
Where, new steps, you go out to take an affirmative step that takes people focused on it, where it happens automatically. They don't even think it through all that much. And perhaps they don't want people thinking about it. They just want to register them on their own. Sort of like a government is efficient in a lot of ways that otherwise would undermine our liberty, with the way that it spies on people. For example, under Section 702 applies that that's an example of another efficiency that undermines our liberty.
We ought to watch out for all of those.
GLENN: Hmm. Mike, thank you so much.
Any just on the Senate race today? In Utah. I know you didn't endorse anybody.
MIKE: Well, yes, I did not endorse that race. I did endorse in the Second Congressional District and the Third Congressional District.
The second I endorsed Colby Jenkins. Who is a fantastic human being. A Green Beret. And I encourage everybody to go and vote for him. Also on the third congressional district in Utah. Dr. Mike Kennedy. Both a doctor and a lawyer, proud public servant, state senator. And somebody who loves the country very much.
So looking forward to the results tonight.
GLENN: All right. Thanks, Mike.
Appreciate it. God bless. All right.