Volunteer vs. Mandatory: Why Not Both?

Today I heard from one of the founders of ServeNext, a 527 political advocacy organization that promotes the expansion of national service. Their angle is to encourage greater federal support for the network of voluntary national service programs: AmeriCorps, Learn and Serve America, Senior Corps, and Peace Corps. I agree that these programs should be supported, at the same time there is a program of mandatory national service. With the mandatory program setting the expectations for all Americans, the voluntary programs would be more sought out, and take a new role in a nation energized with public commitment.

An editorial in the Boston Globe last week [Service: a Corps Campaign Issue] called for greater support for national service, and endorsed ServeNext's campaign to ask presidential candidates to sign a pledge to "more than double the size of AmeriCorps, from some 70,000 in a given year now to at least 170,000 by 2010."

I would agree with that sentiment, though another item in the Globe piece is closer to the Everyone Serves message. It noted that Senator John McCain has been a supporter of national service, stating: "McCain has at times flirted with supporting a more universal program, saying that civilian or military service should be 'a rite of passage for our nation's youth.'"

Let's help all Americans find a rite of passage through service.

Comments

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

What is 16 + 25?
To combat spam, please solve the math question above.