home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TIME: Almanac 1995
/
TIME Almanac 1995.iso
/
time
/
032293
/
0322unk.000
< prev
Wrap
Text File
|
1994-03-25
|
4KB
|
90 lines
<text id=93TT1221>
<title>
Mar. 22, 1993: The Political Interest
</title>
<history>
TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1993
Mar. 22, 1993 Can Animals Think
</history>
<article>
<source>Time Magazine</source>
<hdr>
The Political Interest
Page 38
Life After High School
</hdr>
<body>
<p>By Michael Kramer
</p>
<p> "If I ever win this deal," Bill Clinton said 14 months
ago, "and if I'm remembered for only one thing, I hope it's
national service. It's the best money we could ever spend, and
I mean to spend it."
</p>
<p> As good as his word, Clinton is pushing a four-year, $7.4
billion appropriation for national service, the plan that would
permit students to finance their post-secondary education by
working for up to two years in a variety of community jobs. Even
with a price tag that steep, however, the program can fund at
most 150,000 Americans a year by 1997, a fraction of the
potential demand and a far cry from Clinton's campaign pledge
that "every young American could borrow the money necessary to
go to college" by "giving two years of his life to rebuild
America."
</p>
<p> A spirited debate has arisen as the plan's advocates
maneuver to craft its details. The key question involves the
program's target audience. The Administration is currently
considering giving up to $10,000 a year to those who serve after
graduating from college, twice the sum contemplated for those
who complete their work stint after high school. Neither figure
would come close to purchasing a private education, but the
White House says four years at many state universities could be
covered by $20,000. The three legislators most associated with
national service over the years--Representative Dave McCurdy
and Senators Sam Nunn and Barbara Mikulski--are dead set
against favoring college grads. "Skew it to those who've
completed college," says Nunn, "and you've wiped out a major
rationale for the plan, which is to get kids of varied
backgrounds to work together in a common civic experience. You
also want to aid as many members of the college-age population
as you can who want decent vocational training. Leave them
behind and you pay later in welfare and other costs. And
besides," Nunn notes, "most of the jobs that need filling, like
helping the elderly in their homes--which could save billions
in health-care costs--don't require a college degree." What's
more, says American University president Joe Duffey, "at least
a quarter of those who go to college aren't sure of what they
want, so many drop out. A year or so of service can help them
get their heads straight."
</p>
<p> Clinton initially became enthusiastic about national
service through his participation in the Democratic Leadership
Council. Will Marshall of the D.L.C.'s think tank, the
Progressive Policy Institute, offers several other reasons for
concentrating on high school graduates. "First," says Marshall,
"the opportunity costs to the economy are lower. If a college
grad delays taking a regular private-sector job, society loses
the tax receipts of his labor. Second, since most high school
graduates would live at home and are unmarried, we'd be spared
the ancillary housing and child-care costs the program aims to
pay for. Third, job displacement is less likely. You don't want
to put current wage earners on the street because national
servants cost an employer less."
</p>
<p> During a morning jog with McCurdy last Friday, Clinton
confirmed what others have said, that his emphasis on aiding
students after college derives in part from his desire to
assuage middle-class voters upset with his breaking his promise
to lower their taxes. Fair enough, but more middle-class
families would receive help if their children joined the program
after high school, as a confidential transition memorandum
pointed out. The President ought to reread that memo and change
course.
</p>
</body>
</article>
</text>