Looking to spark discussion on recruitment disparities in the military, U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel (D-New York) last week called for the reinstatement of a military draft to overhaul recruitment numbers and narrow the enlistment gap between wealthy and impoverished soldiers.

“If we have to go to war, don’t just let the poor that come from these communities of high [unemployment] be in harm’s way,” Rangel said on CNN. “Let everyone go, or look for diplomatic solutions.”

In a Nov. 21 press release, Rangel said his main goal in reintroducing the draft is to force all Americans — not just the most impoverished citizens who make up the majority of military recruits — to face the reality of war.

While no legislation has been introduced yet, Rangel vowed to present a bill that would make men and women up to 42 years old eligible for service, with “no exemptions beyond health or reasons of conscience,” according to the release.

However, some legislators, political analysts and students have questioned the merits of Rangel’s plan, calling it a political stunt.

Leading Democrats, including incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Massachusetts senators Edward Kennedy and John Kerry, publicly oppose the idea.

“Senator Kerry doesn’t think the draft is the answer to our current problems,” Kerry spokeswoman Brigid O’Rourke said. “He believes the current army of highly motivated volunteers is the best army in the world and is performing incredibly well.”

While Kerry believes Rangel raises an important point, O’Rourke said the methods are not necessarily correct.

“[Kerry believes] the goal of preventing the United States from rushing into wars of choice is best accomplished by getting civilian leadership in place that understands that war must always be the last resort,” she said.

Cory Kalanick, president of the Boston University College Democrats, said even though talk of a draft has facilitated important discussion, even Rangel knows his proposal has little chance of succeeding in Congress.

“With a few elected officials talking about increasing our level of troops in Iraq, Charles Rangel believes conscription exists as the only logical solution,” Kalanick said. “Still, he admits that he has no political chance of succeeding.”

Kalanick said Rangel’s goal in proposing the draft is to stir up public outrage over the war in Iraq and demand the troops return home immediately.

“It’s true that most people are not being asked to sacrifice for this war — the first time in history that this has occurred — and some responsibility would wake up the populace,” Kalanick said. “However, I agree with the majority of mainstream Democrats that the draft is not a good idea, and I think that Rangel is pushing this issue as a political stunt rather than a genuine solution to Iraq.”

Sargent College of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences senior Sara Marith said while she understands the point Rangel is trying to make, she does not think the draft would be feasible.

“I just don’t think it’s a practical solution or that a majority of Americans would go for it,” she said.

Even if Rangel’s proposal were passed, it is unlikely there would be equal representation from various social demographics in the military, said Anita Dancs, research director for the National Priorities Project, a Northampton research group that tracks Army recruitment as it relates to regional incomes.

“Frequently, drafts are very unfair,” she said. “As shown in past wars, the more privileged people often manage to get out of serving any serious duty in the military.”

However, even without a draft, Dancs said there are serious problems with the current methods of military recruitment. She said the high economic and educational incentives the military offers to lower-income recruits often leaves these men and women with little choice other than to enlist.

According to the National Priorities Project, fewer people in the nation’s wealthier areas joined the Army in 2005 than in 2004, a trend inverse to the growth of recruitment levels from areas with populations that primarily have middle to low incomes.

Dancs said Rangel is trying to draw attention to the issue, not trying to pass a draft resolution.

“A war like the Iraq war doesn’t touch most Americans’ lives immediately,” she said. “What Rangel is doing is mainly symbolic. Obviously, this law isn’t going to pass. There’s no political support for it.

“If people had to contemplate losing their own sons and daughters . . . they might more seriously contemplate the costs and consequences of war,” she added.