Exposure to grim realities around the world through the Internet, globalization, and terrorist attacks have inspired our generation to want to serve. Last fall, 59 percent of 18-24 year-olds said they wanted to engage in “public service.” For thousands of young men and women, this desire has manifested in military service in wars abroad.
But those of us out of uniform haven’t always backed up our beliefs with actions. From September 2004 to September 2008, the percentage of 16 to 24 year-olds who volunteered in their communities decreased from 24.2 percent to 21.9 percent – and that’s less than the September 2007 valley at 20.8 percent. Clearly, for a generation that espouses a belief in serving our communities, we have a lot of work to do.
How do we begin to rectify this trend and expand upon the 2007-2008 momentum?
We can, of course, simply do more ourselves, by taking time out of our schedules to engage in opportunities. Those of us in DC, for example can volunteer at events like the Servathon on May 1. It’s a great event consistent with AIP’s priorities of education and service: thousands of volunteers get together to patch up DC schools. DC Cares (an umbrella organization that connects volunteers with opportunities around the city) still needs almost 2,000 volunteers and nearly $100,000 to meet its goals, so if you can spare a morning and a few bucks, think about helping out. (EDIT 3/30/09: For those of you looking beyond one-time volunteer opportunities to sustained commitments, which often create more social value for communities, please check out volunteermatch.org)
Beyond volunteering more ourselves and convincing our friends to do the same, is there a role for governmental policy to encourage greater service?
This week, the Senate took up that question in debate over the Kennedy-Hatch Serve America Act (S 277). The legislation, as currently written, aims to expand government funding for volunteer activities in a wide variety of areas.
Perhaps most interesting to AIP, the bill proposes to make a series of 5-year, $250,000-$1,000,000 grants in “Youth Engagement Zones.” The legislation intends to use the “zones” to promote service-learning in areas with schools that have a significant number of low-income students or graduation rates lower than 70 percent. The bill currently requests a total of $20mn, with higher amounts in following years, for Fiscal Year 2010.
The bill also proposes a series of grants to establish “innovative nonprofit organizations to address national and local challenges” – depending on the implementation details of the program, it could be a boon to social entrepreneurs across the country.
The gap between service action and service belief in our generation does demand action. We certainly need to light a fire under ourselves and our friends to get out there and volunteer more. But we should also consider the merits of legislation like the Serve America Act.
Targeted grants to effective organizations could indeed make a difference in a time, such as now, when wealthy individuals donate less because of an economic downturn. In the long run, however, what is the proper balance between government grants to volunteer organizations and government encouragement of private donations?
According to research presented by Alex Brill and Phillip Swagel on American.com today, current executive branch proposals could reduce charitable donations by $125 billion over 10 years, a dramatic reduction that could significantly curtail the efforts of many charities.
Could we consider a government policy that continues to provide some grants but reduces the burdens on private donations to organizations that prove themselves? Shouldn’t we demand the same slim overhead of the federal government that we currently demand of any charity we give to?
Posts
As an old person, like my fellow senior citizen Chas. Murray, I am wary of "the government...taking some of the trouble out of life." Natural disasters, environmental work, those kinds of things, fine, let the government interfere as much as the locals will let it. But I worry about where the line is between tutoring (a noble thing to do, I think) and serving as a surrogate parent. Better that we all take the best care we can of our extended families--not shirk our duties there, and then help our neighbors as best we can after that. Government-supported charities are too prone to corruption and political favoritism--I prefer de Tocqueville's "voluntary associations". I think a year or several of youthful service are fine and good, but there is also service in supporting a family and staying off the dole.
ReplyDelete