Towards Universal National Service
For those of us who had labored over the years to build support for a genuine system of voluntary national service, January 29, 2002 looked at first like a milestone. Perhaps stung by criticism that he had asked a solidarity-hungry people to do nothing more than shop and travel after 9/11, George W. Bush made a call to service the major theme of his 2002 State of the Union Address. “We want to be a nation that serves goals larger than self,” he said. And more specifically, he pledged to support a major expansion of the AmeriCorps program that House Republicans had spent years trying to kill, along with efforts to make community service an expectation for virtually all Americans.
While the President deserves credit for increasing the size of Americorps to 75,000, the Congress and the administration failed to seize the historic opportunity to make service a “way of life.” Meanwhile, most of the Republican presidential candidates have turned theirback on the idea of national service. Thus, it looks like prospects for a truly robust system of national service may once again depend on Democrats.
Fortunately, the Democratic presidential candidates are rising to the occasion, proposing a variety of national and community service initiatives.
Sens. Dodd and Obama call for doubling the size of the Peace Corps, and a significant expansion of AmeriCorps membership (Dodd’s plan would expand it to one million participants; Obama to 250,000).
Sen. Clinton would double the small living stipends available to AmeriCorps participants, making full-time service a viable option for a much larger segment of the population.
Sens. Clinton and Biden support the creation of a national Public Service Academy that would offer specialized training to young Americans entering careers in community service or government.
Gov. Richardson and Sen. Obama propose significant college loan forgiveness programs linked to community service, with Richardson calling for a full year of service.
Sen. Edwards focuses on making a significant community service contribution a requirement for high school graduation.
And Sen. Obama is supporting a shift towards community service placements in the College Work-Study program.
All these proposals are in stark contrast to the silence on the subject of national service among Republican presidential candidates.
That’s true even of Sen. McCain, the most prominent Republican supporter to boost national service. And the rest of the GOP field has failed to offer much of anything beyond vague statements of appreciation for those who volunteer their time in community service.
It’s possible, of course, that national service could become a competitive issue in the 2008 general election. Regardless of party, voters tend to support national service proposals, and the underlying ethic of reciprocal responsibility, whenever they arise. AmeriCorps was the product of Bill Clinton’s realization on the 1992 campaign trail that his top applause line was a suggestion that young Americans should be able to pay off college loans by performing national service. And going back a bit further, 1988 Democratic presidential nominee Michael Dukakis said after his defeat that national service was the kind of transformative idea he should have embraced in order to change the dynamics of that contest.
Here’s hoping that the 2008 elections produce a new burst of momentum towards a national service initiative that takes AmeriCorps and other small experiments to a truly national scale, and give us a president who is willing to get the job done.
December 13th, 2007 at 4:11 pm
Ed,
Any thing proposed or enacted similar to above at state level? In Maryland, we have loan repayment for graduates who enter public service, one-year scholarship in return for commitment to one year of public service, and stipends for students who take summer jobs w government or non-profits.
Sandy Rosenberg
December 13th, 2007 at 7:16 pm
National Service is a program that is long overdue. I believe national service should be compulsory. Whether it is the armed forces or peace corps, or AmeriCorps it is an important element in an answer to training for citizenship, training for adult life and training for participation in the workforce. Tuition credits could be built in. College could postpone but not replace service. Employers want to hire interns who have worked for them or have experience. This is a win-win-win.
December 13th, 2007 at 10:26 pm
This country needs more than formal national service programs. It needs leadership that promotes a culture of service, sacrifice and patriotism similar to JFK’s theme of “ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country”. That type of culture might make people more likely to pay a little more for alternative fuels and American made goods.
December 14th, 2007 at 12:53 am
It’s great to see coverage of national service as a campaign issue — and one that could provide a boost for candidates who consistently champion it. It’s also nice to see a quick summary of each democratic candidates’ national service related plans. I would add, however, that each democratic candidate plus Gov. Huckabee have all signed the ServeNext.org Pledge — a commitment most notably to expand AmeriCorps by 100,000 members (for a total of 175,000 annually) by 2012. The Pledge also includes a commitment to support the growth of the Peace Corps, Senior Corps, and Learn and Service America. While Sen. McCain doesn’t sign pledges, he has said that we will double AmeriCorps. Gov. Romney, a champion in the past, has remained quiet thus far.
National service has made tremendous strides over the past twenty years. As an AmeriCorps alum (and co-founder of ServeNext.org), I know first-hand the power and inspiration behind a vision of universal national service. I know I’m far from alone when I call it a winning campaign idea, as well. With the clock ticking — and my vote still undecided — I hope some of the candidates might act on its potential more than they have so far.
December 18th, 2007 at 10:44 am
Also, national service is just another word for bureaucracy. We’ll need hundreds of thousands of bureaucrats to spend hundereds of billions of taxpayer dollars to support a new class of welfare recipients and willing campaign and patronage workers for the Democrats. They will need health care, retirement benefits, unemployment insurance, and God knows what else they will demand. We will create a new group of entitlement welfare recipients. Long live socialism…!!
December 20th, 2007 at 11:00 pm
Service is a choice. You cannot force kids to engage in national service. Besides that, there are other ways to serve. My daughter is serving. She tutors a child from the projects through a tutoring service at our church.
Many kids graduate from college and have debt. You cannot expect them to be keen on the idea of service when they want to get a job and pay down their college loans.
It is a noble thought. But it needs to be a choice.
I would like to see term limits on elected government officials. Maybe many more people would try to engage in this type of public service if they didn’t have to fight an locked in incumbent every time.
January 10th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
Thanks for the round-up of national service positions here; I’ve heard a bit about some of their stances but appreciate hearing more.
re: Sandy’s query about state programs, Mass. has a recently passed Commonwealth Corps designed to extend service opportunities to more individuals, and make it easier for agencies to participate. It was initiated by Gov. Patrick, who has made civic engagement one of his top 3 priorities.