Dodd: Reviving AmeriCorp

» Newsweek: The Case for National Service (Jonathan Alter)

In 1992, the biggest applause line in Bill Clinton’s stump speech came when he outlined a national-service plan that later became AmeriCorps. So it’s surprising that until now no candidate has made service a central part of his or her campaign. President Bush’s call for Americans to “go shopping” after 9/11 teed up the issue for Democrats—who may find that the country is more receptive to this idea than they think.

...

It’s Chris Dodd who is taking the service debate to the next level. On Saturday, Dodd will unveil a specific and strikingly ambitious national and international service agenda in a speech on the same spot in Nashua, N.H., where John F. Kennedy began his presidential campaign in 1960. Dodd remains in the second tier of Democratic candidates. But even if he falls short, his national-service idea could catch on. Consider that Kennedy’s Peace Corps originated with Hubert Humphrey, one of the men he beat in the 1960 primaries. Similarly, Bush’s monumental tax cut was a response to one proposed by also-ran Steve Forbes in the 2000 campaign.

Good for Chris Dodd. But as an unrepentant DLC-nick over the years, this has been one idea I've had a difficult time seeing eye to eye with. Granted, in light of Bush's noble call to shop till we drop in the aftermath of 9/11, almost anything looks noble in comparison.

The problem I tend to have with the issue is one of compulsion ... and who's doing it. Perhaps something that funded and organized the ability for school districts to do so as they see fit might suit me better. Leave the option to them, offer some combination of grants, tax cuts, whatever for doing so. Operationally it might look a lot like the existing AmeriCorp program (which I'm sure Hillary might have a few thoughts on after Dodd gets off his soapbox).

But, by leaving the issue of requirement to the school districts, it affords a degree of choice and free will that a national mandate doesn't. I mean, I'm all for volunteerism ... so long as there's an element of volunteer still within it.. That said, I'm reminded of Sam Nunn being confronted on a televised debate over the issue of "paying" volunteers, to which the good Senator from Georgia shot back that if the "All-volunteer armed forces" wanted to make a similar argument, he'd be happy to review their funding requests for pay increases. So, what's in a name after all?