home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TIME: Almanac 1990
/
1990 Time Magazine Compact Almanac, The (1991)(Time).iso
/
time
/
020689
/
02068900.042
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1990-09-17
|
6KB
|
107 lines
NATION, Page 32The Gap Between Will and WalletShould students perform national service to pay for college?
By Walter Shapiro
National service -- the image of a vast civilian army of
fresh-faced young people embarking on a crusade of good works --
has always held romantic appeal for adults safely beyond draft age.
Utopian visionary Edward Bellamy originally broached the notion
more than a century ago. Philosopher William James alluded to it
in his famous 1910 essay, "The Moral Equivalent of War." Franklin
Roosevelt in 1943 spoke of a postwar America where young adults
would make a "year's contribution of service to the Government."
At the height of the Viet Nam buildup, Defense Secretary Robert
McNamara proposed compulsory national service as a remedy for the
inequities of the military draft. Now, amid the first stirrings of
a rebirth of altruism, the idea has been revived by congressional
Democrats eager to inspire what Georgia Senator Sam Nunn calls "a
new spirit of citizenship and civic obligation in America."
Voluntary national service has long been widely popular; in an
early 1988 Gallup poll, 83% of those surveyed endorsed the concept.
The problem is that given free choice, few 18-year-olds are likely
to sign on at subsistence wages to empty bedpans or monitor naptime
in day-care centers. Existing state and local programs that foster
community-service apprenticeships have been unable to tap the
wellsprings of middle-class idealism; in 1987 almost all the 7,000
young adults enrolled in such programs came from low-income
families. The sad truth is that any major commitment to national
service requires either a pay scale much higher than McDonald's or
the heavy hand of federal coercion.
Last week Nunn and an ideologically diverse group of Democratic
legislators kicked off the most ambitious drive for national
service in more than a generation. They envision a Citizens Corps
that would enlist as many as 1 million young high school graduates
to spend at least a year working for $100 a week in places like
hospices and homeless shelters in their local communities. The
volunteers would also have the option of entering the armed forces
at wage rates significantly below those of regular soldiers. The
national-service proposal -- originally developed by sociologist
Charles Moskos and the Democratic Leadership Council -- is poised
between threat and reward. "It's just this side of compulsion,"
says Moskos, who teaches at Northwestern University, "but we don't
cross the line."
The crux of the Nunn plan is the draconian requirement that by
the mid-1990s, aspiring college students (with a few narrowly drawn
exceptions) would have to serve in the civilian or military
branches of the Citizens Corps before they could receive federal
aid for higher education. No altruism, no college degree -- except
for those youngsters from families rich enough to pay full tuition.
The other half of the bargain consists of a generous educational
stipend: a $10,000 voucher for each year of civilian service or
$24,000 after a two-year military hitch.
The sponsors of the Citizens Corps acknowledge that the
proposal may need to be modified to meet political and practical
objections. "But what makes this plan workable is the connection
between benefits and service," argues Oklahoma Congressman Dave
McCurdy. "If there is a simpler way to go to college that doesn't
require service, it's human nature that people will take it."
Not surprisingly, congressional defenders of existing
higher-education programs are militantly opposed to the punitive
aspects of the Nunn plan. In response to critics who contend that
the legislation is inequitable, Nunn counters that "poor people now
are being hurt because they will be indentured for many, many years
paying back college loans." Yet the price tag for the Federal
Government may also be an obstacle in an era of budget austerity.
Even though the Nunn plan is predicated on cashing in much of the
nearly $5 billion currently spent on grants to college students,
there are as yet no hard estimates of the Citizen Corps's actual
cost. Using small-scale state voluntary-service programs as a
model, Moskos theorizes that $5 billion would cover roughly 500,000
civilian participants.
But something important is lost if the debate over the Nunn
plan is limited to this narrow terrain. The revival of interest in
national service raises philosophical questions that cut to the
heart of American democracy. What civic obligations do young adults
have to the nation in time of peace? Does the Government have the
right to use its powers to compel individual good works? Should the
opportunity to pursue higher education be an entitlement, or should
it be transformed into a reward for Government-sanctioned behavior?
Americans have always been rightfully chary about unnecessary
governmental coercion. Yet there is a consensus that the recent
expansion of the concept of individual rights has eroded a sense
of collective responsibility. Whether it is AIDS patients dying
alone, neglected children or the isolated elderly, there are
problems that erode the civic compact and cannot be solely remedied
by conventional Government programs. And while national service is
unlikely to replicate the diversity of a World War II Army platoon,
it could lessen some of the barriers of social class and race that
divide Americans. As Maryland Senator Barbara Mikulski puts it,
"You know you've changed when maybe for the first time in your life
you think about somebody other than yourself."
National service should not be regarded as a painless panacea
for all these ills of materialism gone amuck. Nor should the
heavy-handed coercion of the Nunn plan be regarded as the only
model. Mikulski, for example, is working on a $2 billion program
that would trade a $3,000 annual educational voucher for part-time
community service. Whatever the framework, national service holds
the potential to help bridge the chasm between will and wallet.
Maybe after a century the time is finally ripe for a bold new
experiment in American idealism.