Bill and Hillary are on the campaign trail making appearances on talk shows around the country. If you own a TV, you have seen them somewhere in the last two weeks. They have covered the Today Show, Letterman, Larry King, Oprah, and Ellen. Not too shabby for the post-Labor Day blitz.
But does anyone else feel that it is a bit strange that they aren't appearing anywhere together, and that there is a distinct Clintonian advantage as they double-team the country?
More than a blitz, this feels more like a full-court press.
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
Defeating the Purpose: Volunteering in America
I have to admit, I was a bit jaded when I saw this piece pop up in Time Magazine because I pitched the same story to Philly Weekly about two months ago and got the cold shoulder. However it's refreshing to know that someone picked it up... it needed to be done, and what better venue.
Our country is changing, as are the priorities of our youth. I went to Washington D.C. in June on a lead from a friend about a protest to end the occupation of Palestinian territories. Originally, I was told that the Palestinian front was going to hold their rally on the east lawn of the Capitol Building, a Zionist group was setting up camp on the west lawn - which is a formula for disaster - and that the Capitol Police were revoking licenses for barricades between the two groups because of a Gay Pride event taking place down the street. It was an odd mix that day.
That was not the case when I got there. Three city blocks and a monumental fountain sufficiently separated everyone.
Nevertheless, I was fascinated by the concentration of gray-haired hippies in the crowd, and the ethnic diversity amongst the much smaller percentage of young people participating.
Naturally, I went to find out more about the disparity by talking to the young people.
The findings were interesting. On both sides of the fence, the fountain and the political issue, the majority of the youth were not there to voice a concern, they didn't want to dialog with the opposition, they on a mission to educate or even to get their side of the issue heard. They participated because it made them feel as though they were doing something for the cause they were so passionate about. It made them feel good.
This is the new wave of community service. More young people are signing up for programs like Teach for America, AmeriCorps and Peace Corps. each year, and they are also finding new outlets to serve their communities. It's a movement being exhibited all around the country - service for service sake - and the way it is happening is a postmodern conception.
This weeks cover story, "A Time to Serve" honored some of New Yorks leaders in community service, and it detailed several ways to get involved.
This kind of service is inspiring politicians to bring service under some sort of federal control to help funding reach more people and to get everyone involved. In fact. according to the article, 70 percent of Americans are in favor of a universal service plan in the US. Proposals are currently in Congress that would create just such a national service program. Some have even suggested creating a cabinet position for national service and volunteerism. FDR would be impressed.
However most of the programs being proposed are offering services presently met by other organizations - public, private and nonprofit alike - there is a movement to develop a system in which these organizations could collaborate with federal support. This raises the question, why recreate the wheel if its is rolling toward progress? Of the 10 recommendations discussed in the Time article, five of the are replicas of existing programs, and two were bond measures. So much for service for service sake.
The fact is that this trend toward community service among young people would be stifled by government involvement. Why?
As the author of the piece states in the article, "People, especially young people, the the government and the public sphere are broken, but they feel they can personally make a difference through community service." They will not contribute to a broken system.
The postmodern youth are too smart for that. They believe in their communities. They believe in the small, nuclear groups that they can touch. They don't trust the big guns of the federal government, nor do they respect it. Believe it. They will see many of the proposed programs are thinly veiled attempts manipulate people into civil or military, rather than community, service while simultaneously removing the burden of certain social programs from the central government.
The best example of this is the proposal to create a National-Service Baby Bond. The concept here is that the government would create a bond in every American child's name at birth which could be applied to college education under the condition that the child commits to one year of military service.
Bear in mind that at 7 percent interest, the $5,000 bond would be worth about $19,000 by the time th child turns 20. Let's do the math here. A child born tomorrow will graduate high school at 17 in 2025. That child, say he/she volunteers for military service straight out of high school, will complete his/her one-year military commitment at age 18 in 2026. If he/she goes directly to college, he/she will still be too young to reap the full benefit of the $19,000, so say there is a student loan taken to cover tuition until the bond matures. Interest must be paid on the student loan, generally around 4 percent. The majority of student loans are federal, so that 4 percent goes back to Uncle Sam.
Also consider that the present growth rate for tuition is approximately 7 percent annually (7.1 percent last year, out-pacing inflation and taking the annual average to over $30K according to an October 2006 CNN Money report), so in the end, the bond will only cover the growth difference.
The gray-haired hippies still attending Washington protests might think mandatory volunteerism is a great idea. Most Democrats do too. But don't expect America's youth to embrace the idea. If you want everyone to volunteer, leave them alone. Leave them to their own devices to see the benefits that lie on the other end of getting involved.
Our country is changing, as are the priorities of our youth. I went to Washington D.C. in June on a lead from a friend about a protest to end the occupation of Palestinian territories. Originally, I was told that the Palestinian front was going to hold their rally on the east lawn of the Capitol Building, a Zionist group was setting up camp on the west lawn - which is a formula for disaster - and that the Capitol Police were revoking licenses for barricades between the two groups because of a Gay Pride event taking place down the street. It was an odd mix that day.
That was not the case when I got there. Three city blocks and a monumental fountain sufficiently separated everyone.
Nevertheless, I was fascinated by the concentration of gray-haired hippies in the crowd, and the ethnic diversity amongst the much smaller percentage of young people participating.
Naturally, I went to find out more about the disparity by talking to the young people.
The findings were interesting. On both sides of the fence, the fountain and the political issue, the majority of the youth were not there to voice a concern, they didn't want to dialog with the opposition, they on a mission to educate or even to get their side of the issue heard. They participated because it made them feel as though they were doing something for the cause they were so passionate about. It made them feel good.
This is the new wave of community service. More young people are signing up for programs like Teach for America, AmeriCorps and Peace Corps. each year, and they are also finding new outlets to serve their communities. It's a movement being exhibited all around the country - service for service sake - and the way it is happening is a postmodern conception.
This weeks cover story, "A Time to Serve" honored some of New Yorks leaders in community service, and it detailed several ways to get involved.
This kind of service is inspiring politicians to bring service under some sort of federal control to help funding reach more people and to get everyone involved. In fact. according to the article, 70 percent of Americans are in favor of a universal service plan in the US. Proposals are currently in Congress that would create just such a national service program. Some have even suggested creating a cabinet position for national service and volunteerism. FDR would be impressed.
However most of the programs being proposed are offering services presently met by other organizations - public, private and nonprofit alike - there is a movement to develop a system in which these organizations could collaborate with federal support. This raises the question, why recreate the wheel if its is rolling toward progress? Of the 10 recommendations discussed in the Time article, five of the are replicas of existing programs, and two were bond measures. So much for service for service sake.
The fact is that this trend toward community service among young people would be stifled by government involvement. Why?
As the author of the piece states in the article, "People, especially young people, the the government and the public sphere are broken, but they feel they can personally make a difference through community service." They will not contribute to a broken system.
The postmodern youth are too smart for that. They believe in their communities. They believe in the small, nuclear groups that they can touch. They don't trust the big guns of the federal government, nor do they respect it. Believe it. They will see many of the proposed programs are thinly veiled attempts manipulate people into civil or military, rather than community, service while simultaneously removing the burden of certain social programs from the central government.
The best example of this is the proposal to create a National-Service Baby Bond. The concept here is that the government would create a bond in every American child's name at birth which could be applied to college education under the condition that the child commits to one year of military service.
Bear in mind that at 7 percent interest, the $5,000 bond would be worth about $19,000 by the time th child turns 20. Let's do the math here. A child born tomorrow will graduate high school at 17 in 2025. That child, say he/she volunteers for military service straight out of high school, will complete his/her one-year military commitment at age 18 in 2026. If he/she goes directly to college, he/she will still be too young to reap the full benefit of the $19,000, so say there is a student loan taken to cover tuition until the bond matures. Interest must be paid on the student loan, generally around 4 percent. The majority of student loans are federal, so that 4 percent goes back to Uncle Sam.
Also consider that the present growth rate for tuition is approximately 7 percent annually (7.1 percent last year, out-pacing inflation and taking the annual average to over $30K according to an October 2006 CNN Money report), so in the end, the bond will only cover the growth difference.
The gray-haired hippies still attending Washington protests might think mandatory volunteerism is a great idea. Most Democrats do too. But don't expect America's youth to embrace the idea. If you want everyone to volunteer, leave them alone. Leave them to their own devices to see the benefits that lie on the other end of getting involved.
Eggs Hot on Syria
Pope Benedict XVI was today in Syria to meet with Vice-President Farouk al-Sharaa to discuss Syria's role in restoring peace in the Middle East. The International Herald Tribune reported that the pope focused on the condition of Christians in Syria and the international influence presently held by Syrian leadership.
Seems the Vatican's stance is that Damascus is going to be a key factor in developing peace throughout the region. No doubt this will prove to be true if Syria continues to hold its doors open to refugees from Palestine and Iraq, a practice supported by the pope. But policy seems to be shifting in another direction.
Reuters reported Monday that Syria is to have imposed visa requirements on Iraqi nationals, limiting entry to those in the economic, commercial and scientific sectors, in a bid to control the flood of Iraqi refugees into the country. This moves is to take effect on September 10.
The United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees estimates that Syria is presently hosting approximately one million Iraqi refugees, and that number is growing by 30 thousand each month.
Seems the Vatican's stance is that Damascus is going to be a key factor in developing peace throughout the region. No doubt this will prove to be true if Syria continues to hold its doors open to refugees from Palestine and Iraq, a practice supported by the pope. But policy seems to be shifting in another direction.
Reuters reported Monday that Syria is to have imposed visa requirements on Iraqi nationals, limiting entry to those in the economic, commercial and scientific sectors, in a bid to control the flood of Iraqi refugees into the country. This moves is to take effect on September 10.
The United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees estimates that Syria is presently hosting approximately one million Iraqi refugees, and that number is growing by 30 thousand each month.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
