Most especially, the bill put forward by Rep. Rangel in the 108th session, HR163, the `Universal National Service Act of 2003′. In the same session, then Senator Hollings had a “mirror” bill in the Senate, S89.

After reading stories about a new “draft” bill, I went to thomas.loc.gov and read the bill. It became obvious that Rep. Rangel had never read the bill, as in four different places where the word “reserve” appeared in S89, the word “reverse” (as in backwards) appeared in HR163, bringing to mind he meant it for retreats and such.

Keep in mind that HR163, with the “reverse”, actually came to the floor of the House and was voted on with this obvious mistake included.

The thought that has always been with me, was the “reserve” vs “reverse” mistake included on purpose, to make sure if both HR163 and S89 had passed that there would still have been no draft ?