Ten Miles Square

Blog

November 01, 2011 10:47 AM Obama, AmeriCorps, and Jobs

By Ryan Cooper

Back in the halcyon days of 2008, Barack Obama talked a lot about national service. He famously proposed a plan to double the Peace Corps and triple AmeriCorps. Though the Peace Corps didn’t get quite that size a boost, AmeriCorps did: back in 2009 President Obama signed a bill to triple its size, though the requisite funds were never completely appropriated. Even before the Obama expansion, AmeriCorps was by far the largest national service program in the United States. It now employs around 80,000 people every year, at a bare-bones $10,000 or so each.

It is curious that the president’s jobs plan does not include anything on the program. If what the economy needs is jobs, AmeriCorps is about the cheapest and quickest way to get some. The program also provides community assistance at a time when state and local governments are slashing their public services—last year alone they cut 200,000 jobs.

It was the National and Community Service Trust Act, signed by President Clinton in 1993, that technically created AmeriCorps, though the first President Bush laid the foundation with the National Service Act of 1990. Its objectives—providing a lot of the grunt work for Habitat for Humanity, for instance—are so unobjectionable it is one of a vanishingly few programs that still enjoy some bipartisan support—more Senate Republicans voted for Obama’s expansion than against. George W. Bush, though his funding of the program was somewhat uneven, consistently supported the ideal of volunteerism, and held an event at the White House celebrating the 500,000th AmeriCorps volunteer.

However, now the Tea Party holds the House, AmeriCorps is suspended over the garbage disposal for the third time this year. House Republicans don’t just want to cut the program—they want to eliminate it entirely. House Republicans, in their latest draft budget, have completely eliminated its funding. In support, Senator Jim DeMint says the program is “the federal government reaching further into the world of civil society.”Given the previous Republican support, this seems odd. But a descent into the fever swamps could help explain the new GOP position. .

One facet of opposition involves former AmeriCorps Inspector General Gerald Walpin, who was fired back in 2009. It’s a long story, butsee here for a list of reasons the AmeriCorps board (who asked for him to be removed) had for sending him off. On that list was a complaint from a US Attorney that in an investigation of Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson (an Obama ally), Walpin was behaving unprofessionally: trying “to act as the investigator, advocate, judge, jury and town crier.” Walpin’s sued to get his job back; his suit was thrown out and he lost the appeal. But the conservative media uses Walpin as an example of a clearly politically-motivated firing, and cites his unproved allegations cited as obvious fact.

It goes on in this vein. Michelle Malkin calls AmeriCorps “FoodStampCorps,” claiming it is “essentially a special taxpayer-funded pipeline for radical liberal groups backed by billionaire George Soros that masquerade as public-interest do-gooders.” Glenn Beck compared the program to the SS, the Nazi paramilitary organization. Ed Morrissey insists that volunteers should not be paid. (Leave it to the 1 percent, then?)

In any case, given that even the easy parts of Obama’s bill have a slim chance of passing this House, one might expect the president to be pressing the AmeriCorps issue every chance he gets. Why not expand a program to the level a bipartisan bill has already authorized? On this, one can only speculate. AmeriCorps has many highly-placed supporters—John McCain is a big fan—and it could be that Obama is trying to keep the program out of the headlines so congressional insiders can save it in negotiations. He did request $1.26 billion for the agency overseeing AmeriCorps in his FY2012 budget back in February, a marked increase from FY2011.

Whatever happens, there’s a good chance someone can save AmeriCorps from the Tea Party’s axe, by whatever means available. AmeriCorps survived the 90s and the Bush years by a combination of those influential supporters and a nationwide network of governors, mayors, and universities. A petition earlier this year to save it got 105,000 signatures. Despite the conservative howling, the program is cheap—for the price of FY2011’s Bush tax cuts for the rich, the country could have hired more than 4 million members.

Back to Home page

Ryan Cooper is a National Correspondent at The Week, and a former web editor of the Washington Monthly. Find him on Twitter: @ryanlcooper

Comments

  • Kiletamine on November 02, 2011 4:18 AM:

    This has all been promised by our Marxist in Chief and his witless minions since the 60s. Fear not, these are lazy what's in it for me, myrmidons, and we simply must turn off the goody spigot starting in 11/10. There will be much gnashing of teeth, you know the rattle, its for the children, vote Republican and they'll take away your healthcare, our response needs to be screw'em! get a job! This crap will only work with the consent of the governed, consent denied! Keep your chin up, we have only begun to fight, the enemy is exposed, he�s inside the wire, but we can see him clearly now, a place these insidious leftist creeps never like too be. If youre in the political business don�t make long term plans, if youre on the dole, you may have too get a job yet! God Bless America!

  • Kim on November 02, 2011 5:50 PM:

    @Kilematine...
    You are a witless idiot.

  • ObamaFan on November 03, 2011 1:42 AM:

    As mentioned, AmeriCorps doesn't pay even minimum wage to college students and graduates who work for it but it provides excellent job training (better than most interns) and help poor communities, especially schools.
    They pick excellent students and send them to places where there are lack of young professionals.

    Obama should advertise about its expansion loudly. it's a cheap way to provide two things we need more today: job training and social services. It's even bipartisan.

    America should and could get better by its quality, not inequality.