The strong emphasis by both candidates for President on military service, discussed in the previous post, could be considered a surprise given the issues that have convulsed the country in the past few years. There was, however, an unsurprising difference of emphasis in voluntary service. Senator Obama showed greater interest in federal programs to recruit and compensate social volunteers, and spoke to the need to attract people to federal civilian employment because federal agencies have been “hollowed out” in recent decades. He wants to “make government cool again.” While endorsing the expansion of organizations such as Americorp and Peace Corp, Senator McCain said “I also wanna emphasize there– it doesn’t always have to be run by the government. That’s why we also ought to understand that faith-based organizations, other volunteer organizations that are completely separate from the government, have nothing to do with the government, are amongst the most successful. So let’s not get entrapped by the idea that the government has to run these voluntary organizations and volunteer kinds of programs.”
The differences were not great, and might be reduced by legislation to be introduced by Senators Kennedy and Hatch, announced this morning, to use federal support to expand both national and non-profit service. Were I anywhere else, I might see this as an unquestionably and completely positive development. But I’m in New York, and have some issues to raise.
I think I’ve figured out the source of unease I felt after the candidate’s spoke last night, as mentioned in my post at the time. They were speaking to a new organization dedicated to national and community service, and telling those in it that they were in favor and would provide support. That could be seen as a departure from the usual pandering to special interests, but could also be seen as an extension of that pandering. Your industry wants government subsidies? If elected I’ll do that for you. You want tax breaks? If elected I’ll do that for you. You want to volunteer? If elected, I’ll do that for you. Both candidates pointed out that in the United States opportunities to engage in voluntary service, and to serve in low-paid service positions, are now over-subscribed.
So once again, the candidates for President were offering to do things for people with money from somewhere, not challenging people to do something they do not want to do for the benefit of someone else. That’s why I titled my initial post “preaching to the choir.”
I considered titling this post “Great Society II?” That 1960s effort was the last time the federal government invested money in the development of new non-profit organizations. Some of the organizations founded as a result developed, evolved, and are doing good work today. Others died off as the Great Society funding disappeared in the recession of the 1970s, along with CETA, a large-scale federal service employment program. In New York, however, some of these organizations devolved into groups focused on their own survival, picked up state and local political patrons, lost their idealism, and became non-profiteers. There have been repeated scandals in the non-profit sector in New York, particularly with regard to Medicaid spending. Some, based on what I read in the newspaper, are “owned” by elected officials in Albany.
Senator Obama might give this history as a reason we need a new burst of social innovation, with new organizations and initiatives in the idealistic stage replacing those that have devolved into the sinecure phase. But also, maybe Senator McCain is right when he says you “have to be careful” about government funding for the non-profit sector.