How did the 1969 draft lottery impact deferments and college students?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
The 1969 draft lottery introduced a random sequence for induction while leaving college (II‑S) deferments largely intact for already‑enrolled students — but it shortened how long those deferments shielded men and tied vulnerability to lottery numbers, not age [1] [2] [3]. Policymakers and scholars agree the lottery reduced the period of uncertainty from seven years to essentially one year for those newly eligible, yet students still faced being called if they dropped out, failed to make progress, or when their deferment expired [4] [5] [6].
1. A reform billed as “fairness” that kept student protections
The Nixon administration framed the lottery as a corrective to a draft system that advantaged college students and the well‑connected, but primary sources and historians show that educational deferments were not immediately abolished: undergraduate deferments continued to be issued after the December 1, 1969 lottery and persisted in various forms until changes in 1970–71 [2] [3] [1]. The public rollout portrayed the lottery as making selection random, yet the legal framework still recognized student status [1] [2].
2. From seven years of peril to a compressed single year — for the newly eligible
One concrete effect of the lottery was procedural: it moved the government away from drafting the oldest first and toward a system that made a single calendar year — the year a registrant turned 19 under the new rules — the decisive window for induction, thereby narrowing the long stretch of uncertainty men previously faced from ages 19–26 [1] [4]. Advocates said this reduced disruption to life planning; critics argued it created intense, concentrated risk for particular birthdates [4] [1].
3. Student deferments: protective but conditional and time‑limited
Available accounts emphasize that college deferments (II‑S) still protected students, but protection was conditional: deferments ended when students graduated, reached statutory age limits, or failed to remain full‑time or make “normal progress” — in which case their lottery number determined immediate vulnerability [5] [4] [3]. Congressional and executive actions in 1970 further tightened non‑educational deferments [7], showing how deferment policy evolved rapidly after the lottery.
4. Behavioral responses: staying in school, dropping out risks, and gaming the system
Economic and historical studies cited here document that the draft — and the lottery’s mechanics — influenced education decisions: some men enrolled or stayed in college to maintain II‑S status, while others sought alternate deferments (e.g., paternity III‑A) or other channels to avoid induction; over 4 million men held paternity deferments in 1969, outnumbering education deferments and revealing the incentives created by deferment rules [7] [8]. Scholars find that the lottery changed the calculus but did not eliminate incentives to use schooling or family status to avoid service [8] [3].
5. Uneven impacts and the persistence of inequality
While the lottery intended to equalize risk across socioeconomic groups, reporting and scholarship show the draft still fell disproportionately on lower‑income and less‑educated men because access to college and other deferments remained unequal [9] [10]. Anti‑war activists seized on continued inequities and on evidence the lottery was not perfectly random, deepening public distrust [9] [5].
6. Timeline nuance: when deferments were actually curtailed
Different sources underline a nuanced timeline: the lottery itself was drawn on December 1, 1969 and applied to men born 1944–1950 [1]. Executive orders and policy changes in 1970–71 — for example EO 11527 in April 1970 and administrative elimination of many occupational and family deferments — narrowed available protections, and some scholars note student deferments continued to be issued until about September 1971 [7] [3]. Thus, the policy shift was gradual rather than an overnight removal of college protections [3] [2].
7. What reporting does not say
Available sources do not mention a single uniform national policy that instantly revoked all student deferments on December 1, 1969; instead, they document that deferments remained but were increasingly constrained and tied to lottery vulnerability [2] [3]. Claims that the lottery immediately eliminated student deferments are not supported by the sources provided here [3] [2].
8. Bottom line for students then and now
The 1969 lottery changed the structure of draft risk — making selection random and compressing vulnerability — but it did not immediately strip college students of deferments: students kept conditional protection for a time, faced heightened incentives to remain enrolled or otherwise qualify for exemptions, and ultimately experienced a tightening of deferment categories in 1970–71 that reduced long‑term shelter from conscription [1] [4] [7].