"Community Service REQUIRED in an Obama Administration"

Mankiw influences change in Obama policy...

From the President-elect's website:
The Obama Administration will call on Americans to serve in order to meet the nation’s challenges. President-Elect Obama will expand national service programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and will create a new Classroom Corps to help teachers in underserved schools, as well as a new Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, and Veterans Corps. Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a plan to require 50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year. Obama will encourage retiring Americans to serve by improving programs available for individuals over age 55, while at the same time promoting youth programs such as Youth Build and Head Start.

In the past, economists of both the right and left opposed the military draft. Will they similarly come together to oppose conscription for community service? I hope so.This initiative brought to mind the opening passage of Milton Friedman's Capitalism and Freedom:

In a much quoted passage in his inaugural address, President Kennedy said, "Ask not what your country can do for you -- ask what you can do for your country." It is a striking sign of the temper of our times that the controversy about this passage centered on its origin and not on its content. Neither half of the statement expresses a relation between the citizen and his government that is worthy of the ideals of free men in a free society. The paternalistic "what your country can do for you" implies that government is the patron, the citizen the ward, a view that is at odds with the free man's belief in his own responsibility for his own destiny. The organismic, "what you can do for your country" implies that government is the master or the deity, the citizen, the servant or the votary. To the free man, the country is the collection of individuals who compose it, not something over and above them. He is proud of a common heritage and loyal to common traditions. But he regards government as a means, an instrumentality, neither a grantor of favors and gifts, nor a master or god to be blindly worshipped and served. He recognizes no national goal except as it is the consensus of the goals that the citizens severally serve. He recognizes no national purpose except as it is the consensus of the purposes for which the citizens severally strive.

The free man will ask neither what his country can do for him nor what he can do for his country. He will ask rather "What can I and my compatriots do through government" to help us discharge our individual responsibilities, to achieve our several goals and purposes, and above all, to protect our freedom? And he will accompany this question with another: How can we keep the government we create from becoming a Frankenstein that will destroy the very freedom we establish it to protect?

Update: The presidential transition website to which I linked above no longer uses the word "require." The passage quoted above was copied and pasted from that website (with bolding added by me). But within a few hours after I posted it here, the wording changed to "setting a goal."I am delighted to see this blog having so much influence on the policies of the new administration.

That's change I can believe in!Addendum: Click here for a shot of the original webpage.

“Vote to Pursue the American Dream”

We truly live in a great nation. We live in a nation where the “pursuit of happiness” is not only a dream or a vision of our Founding Fathers, but it is a reality hundreds of millions of Americans live every day regardless of race, sex, or religion. It is amazing to be a part of this great nation and to know that over 200 years after the Declaration of Independence, the same freedoms and values that set this nation free continue to distinguish it from the rest of the world today.

Nevertheless, we face the task of preserving these values as our country sails in the headwinds of a storm. Our country is currently engaged in a financial crisis, an Iraqi war, and increasing prices at the pump. Though these trials are great, I believe the eye of the storm is much more fundamental in nature. Our nation’s social policies are currently punishing the hard-working middle class and structured to encourage those who are bound to our government’s social programs to remain dependent on them. I will explain how. In 1962, our nation spent more than 32% of all tax revenues on programmatic spending. Today, the same spending on programs such as welfare, social security, Medicare, and Medicaid account for over 60% of all our tax revenues! In addition, health care for every American is on the table and we continue to increase the minimum wage! How much more will that cost the middle-class?

We live in a very competitive nation, the most competitive. But we live in an increasingly more competitive world. Knowing this, as Americans we have choices. Many Americans choose a trade and others choose to continue on to pursue a college degree or both. And both come with sacrifices. These sacrifices can be in the form of overtime hours, time away from your family, or in student loans. I was proud to work for a company where welders, engineers, and managers worked 50-60 hour weeks to provide sustenance, health care, and higher quality of life for their family. However, our current system is giving many of the same hard-earned benefits away for free – or at the expense of those hard-working middle class citizens.

Our current welfare system is designed to bring individuals and households up to the poverty line which in 2007 was $21,203 for a household of four. Therefore, if a family works full-time earning only $21,203, they do not qualify for financial assistance. However, if they do not work at all, they can qualify for full financial assistance up to the $21,203 level and receive additional assistance in the form of food stamps and housing subsidies – both of which decrease in correlation with income. Where is the incentive for individuals to work their way out of poverty?

The minimum wage has been increased and will be at $7.25 an hour by July 24, 2009. What is the objective of minimum wage? In Hillary Clinton’s floor statement in support of the wage increase she said:

“Any setback becomes a major obstacle to being able to pay for gas, pay for food, pay for health care and prescription drugs, pay for tuition, pay for all of the necessities of life. Mr. President, I think that it's hard to stand here on the floor with this amendment before us and not wonder, when will the majority stop giving privileges to the already privileged?”

I do not know anyone earning minimum wage that can independently afford health insurance, prescription drugs, tuition, and all of life’s necessities, much less all of them together. Many middle class wage earners cannot afford these items, so how could someone earning the minimum wage? In addition, why should the hard-working welders and engineers have to work 50 and 60 hour weeks to provide for their family while the government gives these amenities to other families for free?

The truth is that over 53% of minimum wage earners are under 24 years old, 40% live with their immediate family or relatives, and the average household income for an individual earning the minimum wage in 2005 was nearly $47,000. In effect, by raising corporate wage costs, the minimum wage, corporations must do one of the following:
1) Take no action and accept the loss in revenue.
2) Decrease the workforce to balance the wage increase.
3) Increase the price of goods and services to compensate for additional labor costs.
4) Outsource labor overseas.
5) Replace workforce with technological advancements.
6) Finally, any combination of the above.

The social security program was designed in 1935 as a “comprehensive package of protection” against the “hazards and vicissitudes of life.” Today, individuals choose to save less and depend on social security as a retirement package. As it is today, social security is an insolvent program and will have a zero balance in 2038. This means many young Americans have paid in these benefits but will not receive them. When used for what it was designed, old age and disability insurance, social security serves a just purpose. However, in conjunction with welfare programs, Medicare, Medicaid, and potentially health care for every American, social security is simply the final step in a life of government dependence.

What I ask of you is this… In this election, search within yourself and determine what it is that you value most. Our social policies are increasing our dependency on the government. In doing so, Americans find themselves in a poverty trap without incentive to escape and our government wants to pump more taxpayer money into this endless poverty cycle. If salary requirements, health care, and education were part of the constitution, then the United States would not be a land of the free but a visage of its Cold War counterpart.

Benjamin Franklin said, “Our constitution doesn’t guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it.” Vote to preserve your dream, so you don’t have to sacrifice yours by subsidizing another’s.

Resources:
Congressional Budget Office
http://www.cbo.gov/budget/data/historical.shtml

Social Security Administration
http://www.ssa.gov/history/briefhistory3.html

Bureau of Labor Statistics
http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2007.htm