Joe Klein Calls for Substance in the Campaign, Including National Service
Fri, 06/15/2007 - 02:28 — Rob Johnston
Joe Klein has a long piece in Time Magazine this week. The Courage Primary outlines the five issues Klein feels the candidates must address to get his attention and respect. On the fifth page of the online article, Klein explains why he feels we need a new military draft (with a nonmilitary service option). Klein says:
Not every 18-year-old would be pressed into two years of military service. Other options would be available: service as homeland- and border-security guards or airport check-in inspectors. In each of these cases, two years' service as a draftee would be the first step in a career ladder if you wanted to become, say, a professional border guard. College deferments would be available, but they would come with a price: a third year of mandatory service for a bachelor's degree, a fourth year for an advanced degree. College graduates would also have the option, if they qualified and received intensive training, of working off their student loans by serving as military officers, teachers, police officers, social-service caseworkers, nurses and paramedics. But everyone would serve, and the decision to go to war, say, in Iraq would immediately become a personal one for members of the elite as well as for professional soldiers.
It's good to see another pundit addressing national service as an important issue in the 2008 campaign. If you want to add your comments to Klein's article, see the related posting on Time's Swampland blog: [The Courage Primary].
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Get Email Updates
Recent blog posts
- U.S. Community Service Advocates Outline Ambitious Plan for Universal Voluntary Service
- Obama Outlines Service Plan
- Senator Dodd's National Service Plan Detailed
- A Question For Dodd and Edwards
- Do You Support National Service? Share Your Voice
- Chris Dodd to 'Preview' His National Service Plan on Web, Wed 20 June 2007 at 5:00 pm EDT
- Joe Klein Calls for Substance in the Campaign, Including National Service
- Resources and Related Organizations Posted
- Oregon Governor, Nonprofit Support Mandatory National Service
- Melvin Laird Calls for Universal Civil Service
Recent comments
- Who will decide how you serve your fellow man?
7 weeks 5 days ago - out of context
13 weeks 6 days ago - Service is Not It's Own End
24 weeks 2 days ago - Of Slackers and Hubris
24 weeks 2 days ago - Thank You for the Careful Presentation
26 weeks 3 days ago - Mandatory Civil Service
26 weeks 3 days ago - They Can Be a Part of the Whole
27 weeks 4 days ago - What about existing volunteer programs?
27 weeks 4 days ago - ok national service..lets see how about this:
29 weeks 6 days ago - By any other name...
31 weeks 4 hours ago
Syndicate
Comments
What about us?
This idea doesn't hold water with me because there are MANY problems with it. First of all when will the service be performed? If you require kids to do it right after high school graduation, how many of them will go on to college from there? People always say if you take time off from school you will never go back. OK so say we don't make them do it after high school, you certainly wouldn't have them do it during their college years, so that leaves after graduation from college. OK.... so instead of starting their career, getting internships with companies or starting a family (as a lot of people get married at the end of college) they now are required to go do Border Patrol!
Now lets talk about another side of the story, for kids that were not planning on going to college and going straight to work, they now have to put that off for two years to go work somewhere that wont pay as much and probably wont provide them with a skill that they could use (unless they wanted to be border patrol... yeah... right) or would utilize the skills they may have already acquired from another job. What if these kids were planning on working in the same job that they had been working in for several years during high school? Do you think that business is going to "HOLD" their position for them? No, they wont.
And that doesn't even begin to address what a waste of time this would be for college educated kids. They put all this time and effort into earning higher degrees, and instead of using those degrees to make a decent living, they are forced to go work for the government (which, I've done it, the pay is CRAP) in a position that is unlikely to be at or above their capabilities for two years before they are able to start their career. Do you realize that two years after graduation most of my friends are making 6 figures and are on their way to promotions? Talk about cutting their legs out from under them!
By requiring this is will stunt the financial growth of young American citizens. I know you might point to countries like Israel and say look it doesn't hurt their young people, but to that I would say 1) they are always at war and 2) they have been set up that way for a long time so that is how the system works. it's not how it works here.
This is taking away citizens basic rights to freedom, requiring them to serve a government which has already outgrown its original intent, and depriving them of a job they could have using the skills, education and ability they have worked for.
The thing that irks me the most about all of this is that it is people who wont be affected by legislation of this nature (read: above the age limit) who are singing its praises, and they think that the under 30 set will just deal with it because we are normally so politically in-active. That may be true, but if this country tries to institute another draft/conscription you just see how quiet we are.
Some Good Questions
You raise some good points, though I think there are answers to them. Mostly on the timing question, I disagree with your premise that two years away from school will prevent people from returning to it. As a matter of fact, I believe that two years away from school will make college immensely more valuable.
Look at it this way. Today, about 30% of young people go to college. Many are leaving home for the first time and spend a good part of their first few years experimenting with life away from mom and dad. If the entering class of freshmen has already been out of high school for two years and has been in a service role (whether clearing trails, tutoring kids, patrolling the border, or planting trees) they will see school as the privilege and opportunity it is. Many will have learned more about what they want to study and will be able to focus on those ends with a new energy. I know that after World War II the GI Bill brought many veterans back to college and that those older, wiser students were serious and productive. Mandatory service could bring us some of those same benefits.
As for the person not intending to go to college, there are plenty of potential benefits. While I don't think Joe Klein's argument that they would be prepared for the border patrol is that compelling, I do think that the experience in service can be helpful to both the employee and employer. The young person has had experience in a responsible role, with timetables and deadlines and regular expectations for accountability. He or she has also had exposure to kinds of work and to new and different people. All these experiences can help in the choice and selection of employment. For the employer the entry pool is not fresh out of high school kids, but service graduates. They will know that timeliness, responsibility, and accountability are not entirely new concepts and they can expect better performance from these new workers. (Economics argues that if these responsible workers perform better and are more productive, they will also be paid more.) Finally, if there is a national program, all young people will have a common expectation and there will not be those who have a head start or delay depending on whether they served. Everyone serves.
There are frequently laws enacted that treat younger people differently. When I went to college the drinking age was 18. Five years later it was changed to 21. When my father was young all men were eligible for the draft, when I was 18 I had to register with Selective Service. If a proposed change to national service requirements makes young people politically active I would salute it. Register to vote and show that you can make a difference. On the other hand, a good program of national service would make it mandatory for the young and make it easier for older adults to do it voluntarily. Senator Dodd's service proposal shows how that volunteer service can be vastly expanded.
"two years' service as a
"two years' service as a draftee would be the first step in a career ladder if you wanted to become, say, a professional border guard."
Oh yeah Joe, that's what everyone dreams of being when they grow up!
Good Point
Yes, that is not the best feature of the Klein piece.
Post new comment