The proclivity to give back

If community service is considered great and those who “give back” are admired, why should we not institutionalize incentives to perform further community service? I am not suggesting that the United States make national service mandatory — the American emphasis on maintaining personal freedom is too high. It is sad, however, that the only two institutionalized manifestations of American democratic citizenship are voting and paying taxes, especially when only 50 percent of Americans take advantage of their democratic right to vote. The American government would be remiss to use the proverbial stick of compulsory mandates, but it could use some form of carrot.

The government could, for example, allot $10,000 for college or professional training to every student who chooses to take a year off after high school to complete a community service regimen. This step would be the equivalent to the US government putting $4,000 aside for each baby born into a 19-year zero-coupon government bond, earning 5 percent per year, amounting to a maximum of $40 billion per year if all four million soon-to-be college students decide to take the year off to work on behalf of the community. It would also be possible for a post-undergraduate student to take a year off after college for an incentive of $12,500. In reality, a small fraction of students would opt for this service program, because the socially accepted progression of middle school to high school to college would not be altered overnight. This delay could give the government time to build the infrastructure, involve the private sector to cost share and increase potential opportunities.

The attitude toward enlarging the importance of community service was recently exhibited by President Barack Obama and the 111th Congress. On April 21, 2009, Obama said, “Our government can help to rebuild our economy ... but we need Americans willing to mentor our eager young children, or care for the sick, or ease the strains of deployment on our military families.” This quote came right before the enactment of The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act, which administers volunteer and community service programs that are funded under the National and Community Service Act of 1990 and the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973, which include AmeriCorps, the National Senior Service Corps and Learn and Serve America.

A new, expensive government program is a long-term initiative that will likely not be started during this period of recession, deficit and expenditure cutting. However, steps can be taken by smaller, perhaps private institutions to set a precedent for the rest of the country. What better place than Princeton University to serve as a role model? After all, we claim to live in the nation’s service and in the service of all nations.

Princeton could, at a marginal cost, encourage students to use the summer before their matriculation to do community service. If Princeton gave $500 to every student who served the community during the summer before his or her freshman year, the University would incur a maximum of 1 percent loss in tuition-plus-living costs. That is, the University would forego $2,000 of revenue over four years out of the approximate $200,000 students pay for their education.

There is something romantic about unadulterated altruism. It is true that an incentive such as this one curbs the internal goodness inherent in giving back to the community. However, the more people who help, the more people who are helped. It is worth foregoing pure charity for the sake of greater volumes of people receiving that charity. This proposed program is more akin to a symbolic gesture than an overwhelming motivator, and in that sense students are still choosing to do “right.” With Princeton as a trailblazer, the pro-community service sentiment might spread to the federal government, causing pragmatic, concrete changes in policy. Ideally, this action would create a norm that taking time out to help others is not only nice, but also expected. The Princeton persona — and eventually American persona —should be partially defined by the proclivity to give back.

Aaron Applbaum is a freshman from Oakland, Calif. He can be reached at applbaum@princeton.edu.