Republicans never got behind Bill Clinton’s AmeriCorps project, for reasons that have always eluded me. Clinton made the program an integral part of his ’92 campaign and envisioned a program that mirrored a domestic Peace Corps, with young people working in communities in exchange for assistance in education costs.
When Bush was elected, many conservatives hoped he would follow their lead and do away with AmeriCorps. In a surprise move, Bush didn’t. Instead he got behind increased support for AmeriCorps and other national service programs, including a volunteer program his administration labeled the USA Freedom Corps.
It’s hard to overstate Bush’s willingness to promote these programs, including unveiling a plan to increase AmeriCorps, which has been underfunded for years, by 50 percent. As the Washington Post’s David Broder explained, “In his two most recent State of the Union addresses and in dozens of speeches around the country, this president has urged Americans to devote time and energy to community projects. And he has pledged his best efforts to expand government programs of national service.”
You know there’s a “but” coming up, right?
Despite the promises and seemingly sincere rhetoric, Bush is unwilling to put our money where his mouth is. As the New York Times noted today, “[S]adly, this is yet another instance where the president’s actions have not matched his ‘compassionate conservative’ rhetoric. Instead of expanding AmeriCorps, Mr. Bush is presiding over a major cutback in its spending and scope. That translates into devastating cuts for many localities and community service organizations across the nation that rely heavily on AmeriCorps members, who serve up to a year and receive a $4,725 educational stipend.”
Bush is not alone in taking responsibility for these cuts. Congress was even more aggressive in cutting public support for national service programs.
But Bush is the one who claimed heartfelt support for programs like AmeriCorps and is overseeing significant budget cuts for government initiatives whose budgets he once promised to increase.
Worse than just yet another broken Bush promise, this will have practical, real-life consequences. As the Times explained, “As a result [of these budget cuts], thousands of patriotic young people will be denied a chance to serve their country, and cash-strapped communities across the nation will be denied help they badly need. Longstanding local programs with expertise in effectively mobilizing volunteers to deliver needed services will be wiped out.”
How much money are we talking about? The administration requested $324 million for AmeriCorps for fiscal year 2004, which is $40 million less than the amount the White House requested for FY03 (Republicans in Congress, meanwhile, only allocated half of what the White House requested). That may sound like a lot of money, but for the federal government, it’s peanuts. AmeriCorps’ entire budget is less than .1% of the cost of the $350 billion tax cut Bush just signed into law.
If only we had a president who was willing to fight for national service programs with the same enthusiasm he fights for tax cuts for the wealthy. Oh yeah, and it’d be nice to have a president who kept his word and followed-through on campaign promises, too.