The United States Senate is expected to vote on the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) in the coming weeks. This annual bill is considered “must pass” legislation as it reauthorizes and funds the U.S. military. The House of Representatives already passed its version of the NDAA this summer.
Before this calendar year ends, President Joe Biden will undoubtedly sign it into law. That is exceptionally bad news for both America’s defense posture and for any Alabaman who has a daughter or granddaughter. Both House and Senate Republicans, many of whom view themselves as “defense hawks,” voted in support of far-left language that would draft our daughters in a time of national emergency.
Congressman Mike Rogers, who has represented Alabama’s 3rd Congressional District for two decades, serves as the highest-ranking Republican on the House Armed Services Committee. He has long seen himself as a “serious” legislator who focuses on national security issues. However, instead of using his leadership position to speak out against language that would conscript his constituent’s daughters and granddaughters into frontline combat duty, he proudly voted for it.
Indeed, an Aug. 30 press release from Rogers characterized the daughter-drafting NDAA as, “a serious piece of legislation crafted by serious legislators.” This was followed by a Sept. 23 statement that “applauded” the legislation’s passage in the usual stomach-churning swamp speak of a politician who has spent far too much time in Washington D.C.
No mention was made by Rogers in his public statements of the fact that the bill would force every woman to register with the Selective Service when they turn 18 years old. The obvious reason, of course, is that his constituents would be appalled if they knew this provision was in the bill and that he had endorsed it.
He’s not alone in his support for forcing our daughters to register for the draft. Senator Tommy Tuberville also voted in support of the daughter-drafting language when the bill passed out of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Tuberville’s staff, unlike Rogers’ team, actually attempted to justify their vote.
But there is no justification for this policy.
It is an ivory tower delusion conceived in university faculty lounges that women are just as capable as men in high-intensity combat settings. Both common sense and empirical data reveal as much.
A 2013 Marine Corps study showed that all-male units have a higher performance than mixed-gender units in 70% of combat tasks, including marksmanship and nearly every metric requiring both speed and strength. Women have also been shown to experience far higher injury rates than men when undergoing the same training, sometimes at a rate ten times higher than men.
The Army recently implemented its gender-neutral fitness standards and issued its findings in 2019. The report revealed that 84% of women could not meet the minimum standard compared to just 30% of men.
The Obama Department of Defense opened all combat roles to women in 2015 in a bid to prioritize “equity” over our military’s war-fighting prowess. The language in the Rogers-supported NDAA, therefore, all but guarantees that if a major conflict breaks out requiring military conscription, our wives, sisters, daughters and granddaughters will be deployed to frontline combat roles.
America’s enemies in Beijing, Moscow, and Tehran have grown bolder and the likelihood of a future major war in the aftermath of the Afghanistan withdrawal fiasco has only increased now that the world has witnessed the weakness of our political and military leaders.
Politicians can repeal and amend statutory language, but they cannot repeal and amend basic biology. The fact is, my daughter, your daughter, your granddaughter, does not have an equal opportunity to survive on the battlefield.
Rogers has decided to both gamble with our daughter’s lives and gamble that we won’t care. He should pay a steep political price for such foolish arrogance.