Our extensive troop information program will help the trainees in understanding their responsibilities as citizens and as soldiers *

**

We will afford trainees every opportunity to improve their education. They will have the advantages of the entire Army educational system.

There appears to have been an evolution of terms used to describe the proposals; and the changes in the use of adjectives is significant to this consideration of the nature of the issue.

The report to Congress by the National Security Training Commission dated October 1951 was devoted to the subject of universal military training. The report by the Commission to the President dated October 1, 1953, talked instead about national security training and a reserve forces training program.

By September 1954, Pentagon officials reportedly were avoiding mention of the words "universal military training" and were describing some of its objectives in other terms.3 Articles published in November and December reasserted this allegation but said that administration leaders were preparing a proposal similar to UMT for submission to Congress in January or February 1955. Because Congress rejected the idea of universal military training in 1952, and for other reasons, it was predicted that new terms would be used to describe future proposals of this nature. A check by the Congressional Quarterly led to the conclusion that organized groups which have hitherto fought universal military training will continue to oppose any proposal of this kind regardless of the terms used to describe it.5

The extent to which the issue of "universal military training," "national security training," or "reserve forces training" is an educational question is of special concern in this study.

It might be said that the question is educational to the extent that "training" is educational. While in the minds of some people there is a distinction between "education" and "training," in the minds of others the words either mean the same thing or education is regarded as having broader connotations, including training. In common usage "training" refers especially to the development of specified skills, while "education" has further objectives, such as the making of good citizens. Webster's New International Dictionary of the English Language, unabridged, defines the word "education" as meaning "the impartation or acquisition of knowledge, skill, or discipline of character." The dictionary lists "training" as a synonym of "education." It is evident that if we accept the dictionary definition of "education," the issue of establishing "universal military training," "national security training," or "a Reserve forces training program" has major educational aspects even though the ultimate objective be preparation for national defense. Consideration of the educational nature of the issue should, however, take into account the ultimate objectives.

B. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

(WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO EDUCATIONAL INVOLVEMENTS) From the time of the formation of the Union until 1917 the militia or National Guard, primarily composed of State rather than national forces, supplied most of the military strength of the Nation. The

3 Giles, John A. Pentagon Doubts UMT is Answer to Reserve Problem. Washington Star, Sept. 5, 1954. 4 The Atlantic Report on the World Today. Atlantic (Concord, N. H.) November 1954, p. 6. UMT Lobby Fight. Congressional Quarterly, vol. XII, No. 48, Nov. 26, 1954, p. 1385.

principle of the universal draft was introduced with limited success during the Civil War and was applied with initial misgivings but increased confidence in 1917-18.

After the First World War, a move was begun to establish a system of compulsory, peacetime, military training in the United States. The idea received strong support from Army officials, the American Legion, and other advocates of military preparedness. Congress, however, enacted instead a voluntary-training bill which was signed by President Wilson on June 14, 1920.

During the period of consideration of this measure, other proposals were advanced as substitutes for compulsory, universal military training. One of the proposals was for the establishment of a training period of 12 months, half the time to be given to military and physical training and the other half to be devoted to vocational and college subjects. John Erskine, writing in Review of Reviews, declared that the expense for this training "should be charged frankly to national education." 6 Gen. William L. Sibert advised combining vocational with military training. Other persons expressed opinions that the vocational training would be a diversion from the monotony of military drill, would give the trainees better preparation for later civilian life, and would make the compulsory feature more acceptable to labor

unions.

Several expedients to maintain a trained Reserve were utilized following World War I. Under provisions of the National Defense Act of 1916, as amended in 1920, National Guard units were continued under State control. The Army reorganized its high-school and college units of the Reserve Officers' Training Corps, sponsoring such units at over 100 colleges, mostly land-grant institutions. Reserve officers were obtained by offering at these institutions 4 years of instruction in military science along with a college degree. The Army also obtained Reserve officers from the Civilian Military Training Corps. Acceptable candidates who completed 4 summer training periods of 1 month each and passed certain written examinations, received commissions in the Reserve. The idea of utilizing the Civilian Conservation Corps for military training received sporadic discussion in the 1930's (enlistment in the CCC was voluntary).

A system of conscription for military training and service was instituted under provisions of the Selective Service and Training Act approved September 16, 1940.

Between 1940 and 1951 a number of bills proposing universal military training were introduced in Congress. Hearings were held on some of these bills.

Soon after taking the oath of office President Truman began urging Congress to establish a universal training program. In December 1946 he appointed an Advisory Commission on Universal Training which returned a report in 1947 in favor of universal military training.

In 1951 Congress passed the Universal Military Training and Service Act, which was approved June 19 and became Public Law 51. This law made every male between the ages of 18 and 26 years liable to be selected for training and service in the Armed Forces. It also established the National Security Training Commission and defined its functions.

Erskine, John, Universal Training for National Defense. Review of Reviews, October 1919, pp. 416-20.

On October 29, 1951, the Commission submitted its first report to Congress. It proposed a program under which all young men upon reaching the age of 18%1⁄2 years would be liable for 6 months of military training in the National Security Training Corps followed by 7%1⁄2 years of Reserve duty.

On February 26, 1952, the House of Representatives began a general debate on universal military training. The bill (H. R. 5904) would have put into effect a plan essentially the same as that proposed by the National Security Training Commission. The debate lasted 4 days. On March 4 the House voted 236 to 162 to return the bill to the Armed Services Committee. A companion bill in the Senate, S. 2441, was reported out of committee on February 21, 1952, but was never debated in the Senate.

The Army-Navy-Air Force Register of March 8, 1952, reported that: A proposal made by Pepresentative Brownson (Republican, Indiana), providing that students receive 5 hours military training a week during their last 2 years of high school, plus 3-week periods at summer camps, was the entering wedge for the eventual UMT defeat.

C. DEVELOPMENTS DURING THE 83D CONGRESS

On January 2, 1953, President-elect Eisenhower heard recommendations from three members of the National Security Training Commission for immediate establishment of universal military training. General Eisenhower refrained from stating his views on the matter. It was recalled that on June 3, 1952, he had said:

I have never personally understood how universal military training and selective service could operate hand in hand."

Soon after the 83d Congress convened, John B. Spore, writing in the Washington Star, declared that:

Universal military training has had a stormy and unsuccessful history since President George Washington first recommended it to Congress in 1792. But today UMT exists for all practical purposes, and is in operation by all of the military services.

During the hearings on appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year 1954, members of the House and Senate committees conducting the hearings expressed considerable interest in the question of need to put UMT (i. e., the National Security Training Corps) into operation. They also showed interest in any proposals for correcting unfairness in the existing military manpower

program.

On July 23, 1953, President Eisenhower sent to the Senate his nominations of persons to fill two vacancies in the membership of the National Security Training Commission. In this connection the President issued a statement requesting the Commission to submit not later than December 1, 1953, a report including: (1) an examination in inequities in the present method of securing men for our Armed Forces Reserves and the burdens imposed, with suggestions to remedy these inequities; (2) the feasibility and desirability of operating a military training program to supply trained nonveteran Reserves while at the same time continuing induction for service; and (3) the

7 Conklin, William R., UMT Put to Eisenhower, but He Withholds His View. New York Times, January 3, 1953, p. 1.

8 Spore, John B., UMT Exists in All But Name Whether One Li s It or Not. Washington Star January 18, 1953, p. A-23.

relationship of such a program to the building of a strong and equitable citizen Reserve sufficiently advanced in training to permit regular forces to expand rapidly from peace strength to war strength."

In response to President Eisenhower's request, on December 14, 1953, the National Security Training Commission delivered to him a report on A Reserve Forces Training Program. It set forth goals for national security training similar to those previously proposed for universal military training. It proposed that in the beginning, however, the training would not be "universal."

The report declared that:

National security training is in essence a Reserve forces training program.
The report also said that:

Trainees will have a limited military status. They will be members of a component of the "land and naval forces" but will not be members of the Armed Forces. However, Public Law 51, 82d Congress, stipulates that the military departments of the Department of Defense shall be the training agencies and that the training shall be military. The trainees thus will be subject to the discipline of military life.

The report further said that:

The National Security Training Corps is not a branch of the Armed Forces. It is a civilian-supervised agency in which young men will get 6 months of military training preparatory to participation as citizen soldiers in Reserve programs as civilians.

After receiving another detailed report from a special Committee on Manpower Resources for National Security, President Eisenhower, on January 9, 1954, directed the Office of Defense Mobilization to develop a new military Reserves program by April 1, 1954. On January 12, 1954, the President asked the chairman of the National Security Training Commission to "team up" with the Director of Defense Mobilization in the further study. He suggested that the program be based upon recommendations contained in the report of the Committee on Manpower Resources. The Army-Navy-Air Force Register commented that:

By this action the President ruled out any administration request for universal military training legislation in the near future along the lines recently recommended by another agency-the National Security Training Commission.10

11

At a news conference on July 30, 1954, retiring Assistant Secretary for Defense John A. Hannah announced that the National Security Council had generally agreed upon a plan calling for "all qualified young men" to be trained for war.' On August 2, however, the Presidential press secretary announced from the White House that the National Security Council had not reached a final decision on a new military manpower plan. Dr. Hannah said he had made it clear in his press conference that "the program was not finalized." 12 On August 3, the Secretary of Defense said that the administration had approved the plan "in a broad sense." In reference to this newest approach to a form of universal military training, the Secretary declared that "some form of compulsion" would be necessary "to build up and maintain a ready-to-fight reserve.

White House release data July 23, 1953.

" 13

10 President Directs New Reserve Study, Army-Navy-Air Force Register, January 16, 1954, p. 1.

1 Government Asks Universal Draft To Resist Soviet. New York Times, August 1, 1954, p. 1.

12 Manpower Report Declared Not Final, New York Times, August 3, 1954, p. 9.

13 Wilson Approves New Reserve Plan, Washington Post and Times Herald, August 4, 1954, p. 7.

A number of bills concerned with universal military training, national security training or Reserve training were introduced in the 83d Congress. Proposals included the National Security Training Corps Act introduced by the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and others. However, no action was taken by the 83d Congress on any bill to put into operation "universal military training," "national security training," or "a Reserve training program." The only broad general bill which was enacted by the 83d Congress affecting Reserve training was the "Reserve Officer Personnel Act of 1954," approved September 3 (Public Law 773).

In his address to the American Legion on August 30, 1954, President Eisenhower declared that:

Establishment of an adequate Reserve an objective for which the American Legion and other patriotic organizations have vainly fought for more than a generation—will be a No. 1 item submitted to the Congress next year.

Apparently under the impression from this statement that the President had in mind universal military training, members of the Legion assembled in national convention passed a strong resolution favoring such training. The Legion has similarly endorsed universal military training for about 35 years.14

D. RELEVANT CONSIDERATIONS

On January 13, 1955, President Eisenhower sent Congress a detailed message asking establishment of a Reserve system which would require all fit young men to undergo some kind of training or service. About this time the Department of Defense released a pamphlet outlining its "National Reserve plan."

At the time of this writing several military-training-and-service bills are pending in the 84th Congress. Military training ideas advanced by the Department of Defense, the National Security Training Commission and the American Legion are not in full agreement. The Washington Star has reported (in headlines of February 2, 1955) that "Army Officials and Pentagon Cannot Agree on Training Setup." The issue continues many-sided and controversial.

or

The issue of putting into operation "universal military training,' "national security training," "a Reserve forces training program,' a comparable program for training practically all the Nation's young men, is composed of a number of elements or considerations which are very important from an educational viewpoint. These considerations may be summarized as follows:

Universal military training would influence our national life in many respects. It is widely believed that one of the most profound effects would be upon education. Some of its effects would relate to such matters as possible interruption of the student's other educational opportunities, the influence of the military training upon the individual's personality, the influence of the national training program upon course offerings in the Nation's schools and colleges, the possibility that greater inducements to employment would be offered to teachers. by the Federal training organization than could be offered by State and local educational authorities, et cetera.

As described by proponents, some of the proposed Federal training programs have had a variety of objectives besides strictly military

14 Pentagon Doubts UMT is Answer to Reserve Problem, Washington Star, September 5, 1954.