Item — HN Reader

If you're a man that didn't sign up between 18 and 25, you permanently lose student aid in most states along with federal employment eligibility. Some even ban getting a driver's license.

In practice, it's young men of lower socioeconomic statuses that are failing to register. This is due to lack of knowledge or presence in the system more than conscientious objection. e.g. Prison or being homeless.

Many choose to get their life together in their late 20s and 30s, only to find out they can't get job training or student aid. These are legislatively mandated penalties and cannot be unilaterally removed by the current administration.

There's no clause for late signups outside of that window.

The only way out is to prove that you didn't know, which is difficult. There's about 40,000 people a year requesting the paperwork to appeal their loss of benefits.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/04/02/failin...

2 comments

The burden of proof is on the government to prove that any violation of the Military Selective service Act was "knowing and willful". That's almost impossible without a public confession, signature on a registered letter, or testimony of an FBI agent who served an order or notice to register or report for induction.

According to the Federal Office of Personnel Management, only 1% of cases of nonregistrants adjudicated by OPM result in denial of Federal employment. Almost everyone who appealed a denial got their job restored:

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2024-02-07/pdf/2024-0...

Empirically, administrative hurdles are successful at reducing benefits claims rates. Florida found that understaffing their unemployment offices led to steep drops in unemployment benefits claims. The conclusion is only the most desperate people will tenaciously pursue benefits. Most will self-fund.

The merits of such a system do exist. However, the public will withdraw political support for benefits if the number of covered individuals is very low.

> The conclusion is only the most desperate people will tenaciously pursue benefits.

After 30 years in FL working with and around these social systems, what is obvious that this approach locks out those in actual need in favor of those with the abilities to game a heavily one-sided system.

Thanks, I don't like there and this is very important for context.

Thank you!