BOSTON—Democratic Senate candidate Stephen Pagliuca said during a radio debate Thursday that he favored reinstating the military draft as a means of ensuring everyone sacrificed for their country, but reversed course two hours later, saying he misheard the question.
The first-time political candidate repeated his answer twice during the hourlong debate on WTKK-FM, and his rivals immediately disagreed with him.
"I incorrectly interpreted the question to be asking if I would support a mandatory draft in the event we needed additional troops and my answer was yes," Pagliuca said in a statement after the debate. "I now realize that was not the question posed to me, and I want to be clear that I do not support reinstating the military draft at this time."
He said that if there were a need to increase troop levels beyond what voluntary recruitment could provide, "I would support a mandatory draft that would be fair, transparent and equal."
The about-face highlighted the riskiness of Pagliuca's original position with the liberal Democrats who may decide the successor to the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy.
While Kennedy himself expressed questions during his career about whether an all-volunteer military drew equally from all spectrums of American society, he was strongly opposed to the current war in Iraq and he found strong political support in the liberal anti-war community.
Liberal Democrats are being courted by all campaigns in a Dec. 8 primary that is expected to have relatively low turnout.
In his initial response to a question posed by a listener, Pagliuca said: "I would support a military draft because I think it talks about equality, so I'd support a draft."
Rep. Michael Capuano, who has cast himself as Kennedy's progressive heir, sharply disagreed.
"I will never support a draft, having been a child of the '60s and '70s," the congressman said. "I saw what the draft did to the poor and less fortunate of this country. They sent them to war and left the rich people at home."
Instead, Capuano said he favored a mandatory one-year term of national service, in which people could choose either military or civilian work.
Attorney General Martha Coakley did not directly answer the question but said she wants the all-volunteer army funded better.
"People choose these services, and I think one of the great things about this is, the men and women who are serving, who are going overseas, they're not complaining about this. Their morale is great," Coakley said.
City Year co-founder Alan Khazei said he opposes reinstating the draft but favors more funding for volunteer services such as the one he started and AmeriCorps, which was authorized to grow up to 250,000 people in one of Kennedy's final legislative acts.
"You don't need to force people; you just need to fund it," Khazei said. "There are more than 250,000 people who would do this."
He also said the country should have imposed a "patriot tax" to pay for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
"The rest of us should have skin in the game, and we should be paying for it and not passing it on to our children and grandchildren," Khazei said.
Kennedy died Aug. 25 of brain cancer. After the party primaries next month, a special election to succeed him is set for Jan. 19.
Republicans Scott Brown and Jack E. Robinson are also seeking the seat, but the Democratic candidate will be heavily favored given the state's Democratic tradition.
All 11 of its remaining congressmen are Democrats, as are its governor, its constitutional officers and the majorities in each of its legislative chambers.
Elsewhere during the debate, the candidates had a sharp disagreement about whether Sen. John Kerry should have inserted $20 million in a defense appropriation bill to support the Edward M. Kennedy Institute for the U.S. Senate. The institution is planned for a site next to the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library & Museum.
They also jabbed over whether abortion-funding restrictions should be allowed in a final health care overhaul; whether more U.S. troops should be sent to Afghanistan; and whether the University of Massachusetts-Amherst should have blocked a convicted terrorist from speaking to students.
