What is democratic citizenship? In a democracy, citizenship bestows a unique package of private rights and public responsibilities upon individuals. These rights, including freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and a right to privacy, are familiar to many citizens. However, the United States needs to refocus on the civic responsibilities of being an American citizen. Due to an individualistic culture and a lack of military threats on home soil, public service is less prevalent in the United States today than in eras past. Citizens do not have a common enemy to unite against, so they concentrate primarily on their own ambitions. Our nation should increase opportunities for young people to serve and prioritize a rigorous civic education to foster a culture that promotes the common good and sparks young people’s desire to serve the country.
The United States must expand the responsibilities of citizenship to include an expectation that all citizens serve their country, either in the military or in volunteer and civic organizations. If Americans do not foster a culture of service, we risk severing the civic bonds that have tied us together since our nation’s inception. Rather than being mandated from the outset, public service should evolve into a civic responsibility through the creation of a culture in which all citizens feel an urge to serve the nation at some point in their lives. An expectation of service will come to fruition if we make service more accessible and attractive for young Americans.
Public Service as a National Issue
Public service fortifies communal ties between citizens by uniting diverse sectors of society around a common cause. When heterogeneous groups of people work towards a common goal, trust is established between groups, rather than within one group. Former Rep. Joe Heck (R-Nev.), the current chair of the Commission on National, Military, and Public Service, stated in an HPR interview that public service “helps people learn about those who they might not have been exposed to during other portions of their lives.” Furthermore, public service is an honorable calling, allowing individuals to give back to their country and have a direct impact on public policy. It instills leadership skills, facilitates cooperation, and provides valuable experience for careers later in life. By enabling Americans to integrate their individual pursuits with the common good, public service helps to establish an energetic and healthy republic.
Yet while the United States should foster a general expectation to serve, the nation must be wary of making public service mandatory. Mandating service could pose legal challenges. Admittedly, in Arver v. United States, the Supreme Court held that mandatory military service does not violate the 13th Amendment’s prohibition of “involuntary servitude.” Further, in Rostker v. Goldberg, the Court held that the practice of requiring only men to register for the draft was constitutional. However, in both of these cases, the Court suggested that the constitutionality of mandatory service was still in question, and is open to further interpretation. For the United States to mandate public service would risk building policy on an unclear legal foundation.
Creating an environment that encourages people to serve their country, rather than mandating service, is more realistic. Heck has called for an increased expectation to serve, rather than a law mandating service. “The idea behind some form of universal service, or what we prefer to call a universal expectation of service, is that everyone at some point in their life is expected to serve,” he stated. “This will help heal the divides that exist in this country by breaking down barriers and introducing people to demographics that they may not see in their own communities.” Upholding an expectation for people to serve without mandating them to do so will increase our trust in both government and each other.
The Underdevelopment of U.S. Public Service
Several U.S. allies such as Israel and South Korea require national service due to the presence of looming military threats. Under the Israeli Defense Service Law, Israel mandates national service, requiring approximately two years for all citizens over the age of 18. The Israeli expectation of service is due to severe tensions with Palestine and the resulting constant threat of attack. Similarly, in South Korea, all men between the ages of 16 and 37 must commit to at least 18 months of military service. Such an emphasis on service originates from fear of military threat as well, given that the Korean War is technically still ongoing. As evidenced by Israel and South Korea, countries that have a history of war and tension with geographic neighbors tend to have a requirement for citizens to serve at least some point in their lives.
So why has a sound expectation of national service failed to emerge in the United States? One answer is rooted in the nation’s military might, which results in a perceived lack of threats from other countries. In fact, the United States has not fought a war on its own soil since 1865, with the conclusion of the Civil War. William A. Galston, the Ezra K. Zilkha chair and a senior fellow in the Brookings Institution’s Governance Studies Program, suggested in an interview with the HPR, “People are more willing to undergo mandatory service when they feel [a] sense of [constant] threat” — which most Americans, unlike people in other countries, do not. He added, “In the wake of 9/11, a lot of young people who hadn’t previously considered service ended up volunteering. A sense of threat combined with an intensified patriotism probably accounted for that upswing in service.” Galston’s theory has support, as the U.S. volunteering rate peaked at 30 percent for three consecutive years from 2003 to 2005. Because the modern United States has suffered few devastating wars and natural disasters, and therefore not felt threatened enough to unite, service has decreased and remains low relative to other world powers.
However, the absence of military threats is not the sole reason why service is under-emphasized in America. Whereas American culture stresses individual freedoms, many foreign nations place a greater emphasis on the common good, as is evident through their national policies. For instance, in 2019, France initiated a mandatory public service program, in which all 16-year-olds spend between three months and a year working in the armed forces, the civil service, or environmental organizations. France established the plan “to value citizenship and the feeling of belonging to a community gathered around its values, to strengthen social cohesion and boost the republican melting pot,” according to a statement from the Elysee Palace. The goal of France’s national service mandate is similar to that of a theoretical expectation of service in the United States: to bolster social solidarity while granting citizens a stake in their nation’s future.
Furthermore, the United States places a stronger emphasis on individual freedoms, such as freedom of speech and religion, today than in past centuries. In recent years, the Supreme Court has guarded individual freedoms by conceiving of new rights, such as the right to privacy in Griswold v. Connecticut. Galston remarked,“We have seen a very individualistic culture, certainly in the past 50 years. The definition of freedom as ‘unhindered personal choice’ has become more pervasive.” When people prioritize their own personal or professional goals over the needs of the republic, individual freedoms clash with an expectation for public service.
Yet while the Supreme Court has increasingly emphasized individual rights, the United States’ national character has not completely lost its focus on group interests. Alexis de Tocqueville observed this fact in Democracy in America, describing the United States as a “nation of joiners.” That is, early Americans were quick to form voluntary and service organizations designed to promote strong associational ties and collective interests. Contemporary Americans should live out Tocqueville’s observations, emphasizing a spirit of the common good over the individual.
Making a Public Service Expectation into a Reality
For a spirit of service to emerge, opportunities for public service should be made more accessible, especially to young people. Mark Gearan, vice chair of the National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service and the director of the Institute of Politics at Harvard University, told the HPR, “This is a generous country, filled with young people who are looking to make a difference, looking for ways to answer a call for service. The concerning thing is that we don’t have enough opportunities for young Americans to engage. The opportunities [we do have] are not robust enough — [public service] is far too competitive for young Americans to access. We need to remove some of these barriers.”
Some of the barriers to service are economic. For jobs that require a professional or doctoral degree, private sector wages are, on average, about 20 dollars per hour higher than federal wages. As a result, individuals considering public service may be more inclined to remain in the private sector. Kristine Simmons, vice president of government affairs at the Partnership for Public Service organization, stated in an interview with the HPR, “It is hard for government to compete with the private sector: There are lucrative positions to fill in the private sector. The idea is to make public service easier for people to afford, make it more affordable to volunteer.” One solution is the What You Can Do For Your Country Act, a federal student loan forgiveness bill introduced in May 2019 by Rep. John Sarbanes (D-Md.). This bill, according to Simmons, “allows for loan forgiveness for people who have worked in a public service role, whether that’s a military or civilian role, for 10 years.” Such proposals reduce financial hurdles to public service and thus incentivize it for young people.
To take concrete steps towards fostering a culture of service, policymakers can implement laws that support nationwide civic education programs. Developing a thorough civic education program would provide young Americans with a glimpse of the inner-workings of government while enhancing their appreciation for democratic values such as transparency, accountability, and mutual tolerance. Heck is a strong proponent of a rigorous civic education, arguing for a “cradle to grave” continuum of service opportunities. “How can you ask somebody to serve when they have no real understanding or knowledge of the founding of this country and the responsibilities that go along with the rights associated with being a citizen?” he asked. “If you can inculcate the idea of the responsibility of citizenship at an early age, then those individuals would then be more propensed to serve and to give back.”
Enacting measures to create a cultural expectation to serve would facilitate a healthy U.S. civic landscape. Service, whether civilian or military, need not be mandatory, but should become a responsibility inscribed in the American consciousness. By establishing a universal expectation to serve, making service opportunities more accessible, and promoting civic education, the United States would prepare its next generation to work with diverse groups of people, tackling the nation’s greatest challenges. Heck says it best: “Within 10 years, it hopefully will not be a matter of asking if you will serve, it will be a matter of asking where will you serve.”
Image Credit: Creative Commons/DC Central Kitchen