Featured Cause
-
End Homelessness
- 2404 Members
- 2186 Actions
- $205 Dollars Raised
End Homelessness
Recent events -- from 9/11 to Katrina to the current financial crisis -- underscore how much our nation depends upon strong public institutions and competent civilian leadership at all levels of society. We need our nation's best and brightest at the helm of our government agencies, our public schools, and other public institutions to meet the challenges of the 21st century. To attract a new generation of top public servants, we should build a "West Point for public service" called the U.S. Public Service Academy.
The Public Service Academy would be the civilian counterpart to the military service academies — a four-year, federally-subsidized college modeled on West Point but focused on public service. Students would get a free undergraduate education, following a unique liberal arts curriculum focused on service and leadership development. In return, they would be required to serve for five years in public sector jobs following graduation. They would be placed in areas of critical need and positions of strategic importance at the local, state, and federal levels.
The Public Service Academy will transform how Americans perceive, prepare for, and pursue public service. Over time, its graduates will make our public institutions more effective, efficient, and economical. Most importantly, perhaps, it will leave lasting legacy of service that will inspire a new generation of young people to see public service as a noble calling.
There is a citizen-driven movement to build the Academy, and there are bills in both the Senate and the House to create it. To learn more, visit:
http://www.uspublicserviceacademy.org
115 older comments, see the full discussion ^
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Ideas for Change in America is a nationwide competition to identify the best ideas
for change in America. The top 10 ideas will be presented to the Obama administration
just before inauguration day and form the basis of a nationwide advocacy campaign to
turn each idea into actual policy.
Click here to view the Ideas homepage »
First round voting for the Ideas for Change in America Competition closed at midnight on December 31, 2008.
This idea finished in 4th Place in Government Reform category.
Only the top three ideas in each category make it to the final round, but we encourage you to continue raising awareness about this idea by sharing it with your friends.
On January 16th, Change.org will co-host an event at the National Press Club in Washington, DC to announce the top 10 rated ideas and our plans for supporting the formation of a national advocacy campaign behind each idea in collaboration with our nonprofit partners. Read More »
In addition to voting, nonprofits and bloggers can formally endorse an idea they support by completing the form below. If you represent a nonprofit, using an official organizational email address (e.g. "john@greenpeace.org" for Greenpeace) will expedite the process of confirming your organization's endorsement.
© 2008, Change.org. All Rights Reserved.
This user's Profile page is not public. They have restricted it to only their friends.
You must create a Change.org account to complete this action.
If you already have an account click here.
The Case Foundation, a partner of Change.org, is running a campaign called "Change Begins With Me," which
calls on citizens across the country to get involved by answering the question: how will YOU commit to
bringing about change in your neighborhood, your community or your nation?
The winner will receive 2 tickets to the Presidential Inauguration and the Hawaii Inaugural Ball as well
as flight and hotel accommodations in Washington, DC.
No idea is too big or too small. Everyone has a role to play.
To enter the competition, in 250 characters or less, complete this phrase:
It already exist , It was created by President Clinton .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_School_of_Public_Service
Posted by JAIME PENUELA on 12/22/2008 @ 09:23PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
Hi Chris,
Thanks for the background information on Jefferson! I have a couple questions. Did Jefferson advocate for a national university that specifically focused on creating public servants? Did he advocate for the requirement of five years of mandatory service?
My argument isn't against public higher education. It is against a single academy that transforms how Americans perceive, prepare for, and pursue public service. I’m for the mingling of diverse political thought. I’m against the government mandating servitude for any length of time.
Our nation's leaders should come from all backgrounds and areas of our country. If they are all funneled through the same curriculum, they may lack the diversity of views that are necessary to represent all of our countrymen.
Congress is bought and paid for by special interests groups and big business. Those same groups would soon dictate the curriculum and make shills of the faculty at the academy. How surreal it would be to learn of lobbyists courting impressionable, financially strapped students. If you don’t think it would happen, just look at the cars and cash given to high-school athletes by university athletic departments. My fear is that the academy’s political integrity and purity will be spoiled, much like Congress.
There is a lot to say for public servants who have educational diversity and have varied professional backgrounds. My mother is a teacher who was a city councilman and vice mayor. She served with lawyers, architects, small business owners, doctors and engineers. Their professional and geographical diversity better represented the people of the city. Working in the private sector is important for the formulation of your professional skill set and political makeup. I believe it makes public servants better at understanding those they serve—the people.
Rolling thousands upon thousands of the same political robot off the assembly line will not make for a representative government.
Posted by Travis Carter on 12/23/2008 @ 12:17AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
Jaime claims that a School of Public Service already exists. The Clinton School is very different from the proposed Academy. I hope you will look more carefully at our proposal: http://www.uspublicserviceacademy.org
You will see many differences between the Public Service Academy and the Clinton School:
1) Clinton School is for graduate students; Academy is for undergrads.
2) Clinton School has no post-graduation service requirement; Academy requires five years in public service.
3) Clinton School defines public service broadly to include volunteering, non-profits, government, etc.; Academy focuses solely on public sector.
4) Clinton School is a state program; Academy is federal.
The Dean of the Clinton School has endorsed the Academy proposal and is a big proponent.
Posted by Chris Myers Asch on 12/23/2008 @ 06:09AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
There are numerous ways to build community and learn to work together. The best effort will not work if the mind set of individuals remain self centered and looking out for their own interest. When community learns to come together then change will occur. I believe President Elect O'Bama has the leadership and the best interest of America at heart. It is my desire to find areas of community involvement and remain involved in the lives of others.
Posted by Helen Easley on 12/23/2008 @ 06:10AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
The Academy will be a defining American institution of the 21st Century. This is an idea whose time has come.
Posted by Shawn Raymond on 12/23/2008 @ 10:04AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
It is apparent that we will have serious problems getting government workers at every level if we don't do something about it now. However I would like to see some checks and balances which I'm sure will be added. If not then it might turn into something nasty.
Posted by David Samaha on 12/24/2008 @ 11:23AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
Most excellent idea, and I want to sign up!
Posted by Diane Levesque on 12/25/2008 @ 08:15PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
I would like to mention to those people bashing FEMA and President Bush that it wasn't their fault at all. Anyone who know the FACTS with Katrina would know this. Then again most of you probably delve into the obama media for all of their so called information. From all CREDIBLE sources you will find that the blame is mostly placed on governor blanco and mayor nagin for not taking control of the situation and arguing over who was going to handle the situation. President Bush could not do anything until blanco declared a state of emergency.For the topic of US public service academy this is a joke. More wasteful spending by the federal government that has created our current economic problems. The whole reason for this "academy" is to create a breeding ground of liberals such as obama. Seems like one is enough to me.
Posted by Josh Anderson on 12/26/2008 @ 10:18PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
Josh,
Before attempting to disparage the U.S. Public Service Academy idea, you should actually take a moment to read the Blueprint document, which you can find -- www.uspublicserviceacademy.org. If you did, you would see that three former West Point Superintendents (all Lt. Gens.) and more than two dozen admirals and generals have endorsed the Academy. This is not exactly a crowd interested in creating -- to use your words -- "a breeding ground for liberals." Indeed, the Academy will attract young Americans of all political stripes who share a common interest in serving their country.
I encourage you to review the proposal more carefully and would be delighted to visit with further about it.
Posted by Alicia Raymond on 12/27/2008 @ 06:55AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
While I agree Josh ought to look at your proposal, I suggest you check into Harvard's relationship to the Massachusetts constitution. Like most colonial universities - and there were, after all, 12 or so by 1776, they were ALL "service academies" for one group or another - usually a church, as were, for that matter, the universities of Europe. Why there is a need for another, since that is the foundation for all university tax exemptions, is astoundingly naive, reflecting the narrow vision of the existing military academies, who were largely created to reify the military leadership of each of the - then - two, then three, then four military services. You might just as well ask for a Service Academy for the Marines, while your at it. Or, for that matter, eliminate ROTC since it undermines the "value" of a real leadership academy like West Point.
Look into the history of higher education a little further before taking so many into such well charted waters that the reefs exceed their displacement. Or, perhaps, that's a matter for Anapolis!
Posted by Joe Beckmann on 12/27/2008 @ 08:16AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
There is a need for a federal level entity with branches in all the states, not confined to Massechusetts.
Posted by Diane Levesque on 12/27/2008 @ 10:16AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
Chris, the problem with the proposal as posted at the Academy website is that it focuses on young people. We seniors who have worked most of our lives only to find our retirement and medical yanked out from under us in our autumn years need to be repurposed.
I'm an undergrad several times over and I'm still useful. Believe it or not.
Posted by Diane Levesque on 12/27/2008 @ 10:19AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
Hey, Diane! You apparently don't know about the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, which created the US Midwest and mapped thousands of "townships" to finance their own Academies (called schools!); nor about the Land Grant Colleges founded in 1863, all founded to create exactly this same kind of "academic" foundation for farming and industry, government and "charities," as they then called the nonprofit "industry." It's not been only Massachusetts since, oh, about 1701, when a bunch started Yale in Connecticut to do just about the same thing!
Posted by Joe Beckmann on 12/27/2008 @ 10:40AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
If there's such a thing in the state of Oklahoma, they're hiding it pretty well.
Like I said, we need something more like this Academy, accepting seniors and the middle-aged along with the young, in every state so that we can see 'em. They're no good if they've been hidden (or put out of business) since the 17 and 1800's. We're in the 2000's now. Time for CHANGE. Change is why I'm here in the first place.
Posted by Diane Levesque on 12/27/2008 @ 11:00AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
My concern is that the University of Oklahoma was founded, and is still tax supported, and tax exempt, to achieve the same goals as this new Academy. If it's no longer meeting that responsibility, it's the citizens of Oklahoma who are to blame, not anyone else. And, given Inhofe's re-election, it would seem that there are many in Oklahoma who could care less. On this, I'm a federalist: take care of your own house and we'll take care of ours. In Massachusetts we've lots of colleges and many of Oklahoma - and Paraguay for that matter - come here to do their "service academy" stint before becoming rich. My concern is to get those colleges to do what they're tax exempt to do: to deliver back to their host communities that for which we've given them funds and exemptions. Here, it's THE local industry (next to finance, which will probably fade in the next year anyway). But in Oklahoma you've got your own problems with your own Uni. Shake'em up. Challenge that tax exemption to deliver back to the state that for which the state delivers funding! Not just oil executives!
Posted by Joe Beckmann on 12/27/2008 @ 11:13AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
At this point, both the state of Oklahoma and your statements (in addition to the events of the past 8 years) have proven what a failure federalism is. Oklahoma is where the federalists have holed up, circling their 18th century wagons with the likes of Inhoff remaining unshakable--the more you shake him the more stubborn he gets. It'll take the feds to pull rank on that boy.
Posted by Diane Levesque on 12/27/2008 @ 12:32PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
...well...second thoughts here, after reading the Academy's FAQs. I'd have to agree with Trevor Lovell's comments further up this page, re: political cliques and erstwhile the politically well-connected. It seems that participation in this Academy depends predominantly on nomination, and yeah--I don't go for that. Should be based exclusively on demonstrable performance, like in standard school and/or employment record.
I've seen patronage run amok with the concept of nomination.
Posted by Diane Levesque on 12/27/2008 @ 12:47PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
Read a previous post . . . " Posted by JAIME PENUELA on 12/22/2008 @ 09:23PM PST "
and you'll see that this entire thread is cool and all. But it's not a new idea.
The school already exists. It was created by President Clinton.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_School_of_Public_Serviceor: directly
http://www.clintonschool.uasys.edu/
IINSTEAD of the much discussed academy -- try the idea of paying Americorps Service people a living wage in a structure like that of military enlisted.
See my idea:
http://www.change.org/ideas/view/make_americorps_a_branch_of_service
Cheers and Happy New Year,
Roger S. Duncan, Current Navy, Former Americorps, Photographer
Posted by Roger Duncan on 12/27/2008 @ 12:53PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
I tried to get onboard with Americorps and found that just as prohibitive as the concept, per its FAQ sheet, as this Academy is. And the more I read, the less in favor of the Academy I am. FAQ states that only 5,100 top students from the US *and the world* are expected to be funded by every American. Seems to me that even if it's just 70¢ for every American, every American should get something back for that money. Subsidizing the world ain't it. If the world attends then the world should kick into the kitty; if every American is expected to kick in, then every American should be able to qualify.
Seems to me that the last 8 years has also proven what a failure elitist think-tanks are. We don't need another one.
Your Americorps idea would be good if it, too, wasn't so exclusive either. Open it up to every American or I won't support it.
Posted by Diane Levesque on 12/27/2008 @ 01:25PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
Re-invest in the people of the future the childeren that need money to go to college and to get an education. Start by teaching people and thats where it can be fixed. Teach people new ways to invest in the stock market new ways to teach and to learn. Invest in research in colleges for a cure for cancer. More research in stem cells because that we can save millions of lifes. Teaching is the way that we can fix the economy. New jobs that are created to help the planet start by learning. We learn and thats how we fix things. It is a very simple solution give more funding and for the pay of college tuition. A new research and development part to each college researching new types of energy that are renewable and will help the environment. Making college tuition more affordable to everyone will allow more people to go to college that deserve to go. Teaching more people in higher education will help everything.
Posted by Douglas Cowing on 12/27/2008 @ 08:37PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
Roger,
Again, the Clinton School is NOT a Public Service Academy. The Clinton School is very different from the proposed Academy. I hope you will look more carefully at our proposal: http://www.uspublicserviceacademy.org
You will see many differences between the Public Service Academy and the Clinton School:
1) Clinton School is for graduate students; Academy is for undergrads.
2) Clinton School has no post-graduation service requirement; Academy requires five years in public service.
3) Clinton School defines public service broadly to include volunteering, non-profits, government, etc.; Academy focuses solely on public sector.
4) Clinton School is a state program; Academy is federal.
The Dean of the Clinton School has endorsed the Academy proposal and is a big proponent.
As for Diane's concern about international students: The Academy will be an international campus and as such must have international students. They will have to make a similar commitment to serve their home country, and the costs of their education will be paid by their home countries, not Americans.
We want excellence in our sports teams, we want excellence in our military, we want excellence in our education. Why should we not want excellence in our government too? That is what this Academy is all about.
Posted by Chris Myers Asch on 12/28/2008 @ 07:03AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
All,
I see the differences between the PS Academy idea and the Clinton School. I'm still not on board with the PS Academy idea though. I have 2 primary reasons.
1. As an enlisted military member and a former member of Americorps, my experience leads me to the opinion that academy-trained officers are generally less effective in leadership roles than those who are advanced from the enlisted ranks.
(aside: This is my opinion and I am not in speaking about anyone directly. I've seen OUTSTANDING leadership in officers who were formerly enlisted.)
If an expanded Americorps model were adopted, this would create the same kind of steady service leadership (which I think you seek to develop through the academy) without the cultural disconnect between academy-trained officers and job-trained enlisted.
2. Where does the academy plan to employ graduates who are required to have five years of service? Are there plans in place to fund high-level positions for these people? In Government? Yikes. . . this will quickly cost more than the academy itself. Do these positions yet exist? Is it even needed?
I contend that need does exist in a host of non-profit orgs around the nation who are currently working with Americorps -- or aren't because the structure is prohibitive for their mission or needs.
I suggest that instead of creating another disconnect between officers and enlisted with another academy that the existing Americorps structure be adjusted to support and educate those junior enlisted who are ready to step up to officer level. Fix those problems which are keeping people out of Americorps.
By creating a series of paygrades by which service people could both be paid reasonably and entrepreneurially devise a mobile career track within a network of public service providers, you'll create and build leaders not from school -- but from service itself. In this era of budget cuts and results-focus, I'd like to see people actually working and getting things done rather than sitting around talking about it in another academic forum.
Check out this idea: http://www.change.org/ideas/view/make_americorps_a_branch_of_service
And read the dialog afterwards -- we've discussed it at length already. It's not about ranks, uniforms or boot camp -- it's about meeting the nation's needs by uniting people who are already there in the trenches with those who want to add their own idealistic and energetic enthusiasm. Fundamentally, it's combining vision with funding. I think that the people in the streets already know what it is that they need to do to meet their missions. They need warm bodies to help do hard work and money to pay them. They don't need another fresh face out of school coming with great educated plans and wanting to be in charge. Fund the low levels well first and then grow those people up to meet higher level needs. Then, let them retire when they're ready to go.
And - if you fund retired service pros, wouldn't that be a great resource for a base of consultants? There's another good byproduct of this idea . . .
And - Diane L. . . . what are you talking about?
Why is Americorps not open to every American already? This should be an easy fix. When massive changes in structure are underway -- then make all the needed changes at once and get it over with.
Finally, If the Academy does indeed become a reality, utilizing the existing Americorps network will be absolutely required to employ all these newly minted leaders. Then -- we'll need a few development directors and some industry in the US to support the development of our non-profit orgs. We have a long way to go before we're out of this economic crisis. Let's not get too hyperfocused on public service.
Roger S. Duncan Current Navy, Former Americorps, Photographer
Posted by Roger Duncan on 12/28/2008 @ 08:50AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
Roger, you bring up very compelling points indeed. When I first voted for this concept, I was under the impression that it was an open enough organization via which residents of a neighborhood or region could roll up their sleeves and invest "sweat equity" in their own communities.
Now I wish I could retract my vote, after reading the devils in the details.
The rejection of my application to serve in Americorps makes no sense to me either, so I'm at a lost as how to explain it. The excuse I got was that openings were limited. A loaded crock, that.
Posted by Diane Levesque on 12/28/2008 @ 11:50AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
Diane, Actually. . . I'm OK with the concept of limited openings. Having a competitive process is healthy for those who are accepted. If we were able to fund these jobs with a degree of professionalism, then we'd really see competition.
I'm also OK with the concept of working for an existing organization which actually needs help. If your local community non-profits are not applying to Americorps for helpers, then we need to figure out why and start there.
I think that if Americorps were expanded, we'd see a lot more non-profit orgs being able to put people like you to work in their own hometowns. As it stands today, there are both limited funds and a limited number of organizations who need exactly what Americorps has to offer.
And -- Diane, you point out an important part of this whole mess which I've acknowledged already. The devil IS in the details and in order to make this work, we'll need the administrators and political representatives on our side.
So -- I say to all -- write your senators and representatives with your thoughts. Make sure you use a spell checker -- but do it!
Roger S. DuncanBath, MaineCurrent Navy, Former Americorps, Photographer
Posted by Roger Duncan on 12/28/2008 @ 12:26PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
In other words, even though people need help, you would refuse to let able people chip in to help. Sorry, I just don't get that sort of mentality. Same goes with the exclusivity of the Academy. Exclusionary elitists should have gotten a clue with the elections their kind have lost for them. Elitists are personna non grata.
Posted by Diane Levesque on 12/28/2008 @ 02:59PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
I wonder who, on this list, has actually developed proposals for AmeriCorps' annual (actually it's both more and less frequent than that, but that's part of the problem) application. There are both state and national competitions, and a variety of cycles within each of those, some with state money, some with federal, some directly to Washington, some to or through your state who decides, and some to your state who advises the federal competition. Combined with CityYear, YouthBuild, and god knows how many Work Study options (depending on your region), this can be a full time project and almost year round. For benefits that are remarkably sparse.
First, AmeriCorps really wants people to wholesale these options, rather than deal in the retail business of one person/one placement. Then they use "contract agencies" to filter and to review even those wholesale applications. It's like dealing with Blackwater to get some electricity in Baghdad!
Perhaps they'd be best advised to staff themselves first, and then offer help. If they are the model for a Service Academy it will represent the worst kind of nightmare.
And this is NOT the case I'd make. Rather, the universities - some of them at least - can and do manage exemplary work-study, internship, and other kinds of hybrid resume building opportunities for their students. The best models rarely get enough credit; while the worst often get the most funding. In this I contrast MIT, who frequently matches a task with a student and a faculty co-sponsor; with Tufts, who dumps ill prepared and well meaning middle to upper middle class kids in the midst of often very small, very under-funded agencies, in spite of their $50,000,000 special endowment for "Service Learning."
Even if you plan to ignore these precedents, it might be useful to look at more than the US Service Academies for effective models. Not only are there serious problems (but clearly resolvable) with placement and supervision, but there are even more elaborate problems with mobility. How does one equate work in a 3 person small agency with a large bureaucracy, let alone what role or responsibilities one might get in either setting?
Posted by Joe Beckmann on 12/28/2008 @ 03:00PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
Incidentally, Diane, it's not elitism to filter for criminal records checks and childcare; for violence checks and mental health; for physical psychomotor skills and personal care attendants; for tech skills and Management Info Systems. And a warm body is often just the wrong thing for a service academy to send to "solve" a problem a small agency may desperately need solved in a short time.
Posted by Joe Beckmann on 12/28/2008 @ 03:03PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
I didn't say it was. What I'm saying is that establishing a de facto ruling class and other forms of exclusivity is against the American principle of E Pluribus Unum. And like I said, the last few election losses should be Clue One that any old guard perceived as members of the old ruling class, be it Republican or Democrat, are OUT.
Excluding perfectly good non criminal people under the excuse of excluding the criminals shouldn't have flown in Florida elections and shouldn't fly here either.
Posted by Diane Levesque on 12/28/2008 @ 03:44PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
Let me be clearer: what's proposed to teach to no more than roughly 5K students should be taught as basic civics in EVERY school, to EVERY student, as a requisite for participating in our democratic republic. Teaching basic civics to just a few thousand AND foreigners is a non-starter where I'm concerned.
Remove my vote, please.
Posted by Diane Levesque on 12/28/2008 @ 04:01PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
Do not misunderstand. A helping hand is usually not what most small nonprofits need, although that is often what they'll say and what is offered. A day care center may accept help, but, if the helper knows little about how children develop, the limited professional staff end up working HARDER and LONGER. An elderly center may accept help, but, again, if the volunteer/helper is impatient, gets in arguments with clients, or, simply, independently motivated to advocate for a friend, argue for a different treatment, or take longer in helping a particular case, the whole organization can suffer.
It does real harm to presume that another set of hands is all that's needed, and that real skills are not really required for most tasks in any organization. A commitment of substantial time, of real training, and of serious intention is most certainly a filter and has nothing whatsoever to do with a ruling class. Too many small nonprofits have inadequate staff or time to recruit, orient, supervise or help a part time volunteer. Help can hurt ... a lot.
Posted by Joe Beckmann on 12/28/2008 @ 04:04PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
Be that as it may be, you're offering another bogus excuse to just tell an applicant NO even before you establish what the applicant's strong suits are, while tacitly making the claim that all your volunteers are merely warmbodies you assign to any ole where. You're basically saying that it doesn't matter if I'm a plumber because no matter what my specialty may be, you're going to assign me to an electrician's job.
Please don't expect me to buy any more of that type of excuse--excuses are all they are.
And I'd like to know where you get off insisting that you're going to filter out all criminals including the ones that get assigned community service as part of their sentence.
Please--no more excuses. I'm not in the market for excuses.
Posted by Diane Levesque on 12/28/2008 @ 04:14PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
One more thing--this discussion has gotten me to feel strongly enough about this matter that I'm posting a counterproposal on Change.gov, incorporating all the reasons why neither this idea nor the Americorps idea are suitable.
Posted by Diane Levesque on 12/28/2008 @ 05:07PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
Supporters of this idea, I think you're recognizing the need for a systemic change, but what you're really looking for is solidarity and civic education PRE-university for all young people, not a regiment of prestiged, militarized youths that bolster hierarchies and coercive traditions of the federal government.
We need to create a society where every community has a decision making process or structure that provides for the least fortunate and oppressed.
That has never been the intention of any government, which are always meant to preserve blind nationalism, predatory capitalism, or hateful theocracy at the expense of human life and liberty.
I fail to see how an aparted institution, with a hierarchical command structure like West Point, will provide organizing experience, peoples' history, and community interaction enough to produce anything but ethnocentric automatons to protect everything that oppresses us.
Posted by Alex Lotorto on 12/29/2008 @ 10:56AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
Not just a West Point-like command structure, but an echo chamber of 5,000-ish kids. You might as well call them Janizaries or Praetorians for all the good that does. American money should be directed to the benefit of more than 5,000-ish patronized kids inside a cloistered echo chamber.
Posted by Diane Levesque on 12/29/2008 @ 04:39PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
I think this idea is great I had a similar idea when President Obama said "I need your help." I thought that after the training, suggested by your proposal, the public service workers could work in the communities in an organized fashion run somewhat like the military, but for peace and proactive reasons.
I think that all the grassroots organizations have been great movements but it is time to organize them and group them together to accomplish specific goals, such as, all the groups for Autism could be brought together as one. The people trained at these public service academies, could be placed in strategic positions in the one all emcompassing organization.
I also think uniforms with the flag stitched over the heart might be nice addition to the academy. (Connie Gretsch, educator)
Posted by Connie Gretsch on 12/30/2008 @ 07:06AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
In the end, regardless of path or sector, character and wisdom define our ability to constructively implement our intentions -
People can choose to feel separate from society working within any sector - it is a mindset borne of character as to whether you feel part of or separate from anything
I worked for 12 years as a public servant nonprofit activist - 3years in the for profit sector and now more recently - eight years in government service - public service work and training does not make you feel separate from society - in fact, it provides an opportunity to immerse you in society - other sectors can also provide the same opportunity.
I think Public Service Training is a great concept and can provide wonderful grounding, context, perspective.... but it can be implemented well or poorly depending on the character and abilities of those providing the training.
The character of those seeking the training is also important to the equation.
Posted by Valerie Frances on 12/30/2008 @ 07:47AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
Social Science degrees already exist. Social workers are over worked and underpaid. How about creating incentives for those who want to help others to enter the field. There are few incentives today. I have watched good people enter social services and morph into cynicism as the reality that their states overuse them as tokens for the state to be able to say:
We are addressing these problems
When, in reality, they are underserving the most vulnerable communities.
Shameful!
Posted by Sonja Mitchell on 12/30/2008 @ 10:17AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
The worst part about this idea is it is one more move to destroy the Republic.
If this is a great idea then some states should try it and if it works other states can copy it. Oh wait, state colleges, national guard etc. These things do exist.
Why do you people want to destroy the freedom of the states and the Republic?
Wouldn't you rather have 50 states that range from liberal to conservative than one huge oppressive federal government that changes the direction every four years as leadership changes?
And why do we need to build this huge nationalist movement? I am an Okie first, second I am an American.
Next time the South won't secede from the Union, we are kicking the other states out.
Posted by Grant Robinson on 12/30/2008 @ 10:36AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
I think the only concern I see with this idea is that it puts the government in charge of training the future government. I think that makes me a bit antsy. I would definitely be in favor of seeing a school like this happen--but I'm not particularly sure the government ought to be running it. Why not just create a subsidy and/or tax breaks for schools that start a program modeled after the idea?
Posted by April Eubank on 12/30/2008 @ 11:56AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
Just what we need: bigger government, more bureaucracy, more socialism, all which lead to more taxation.
Some folks just don't seem to get it.
Posted by Jay Gladwell on 12/30/2008 @ 12:01PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
1) A school intentionally limiting itself to 5,000 students is not a public school and should not get public funding. It should seek local and/or private funds.
2) Giving an advantage to those nominated by political people gives unfair advantage to the politically well connected, ergo it foments patronage and all the corruption that goes with it.
I'm removing my vote from this.
Posted by Diane Levesque on 12/30/2008 @ 01:20PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
The world is lacking leaders who are developed through a formal curriculum in leadership development, theory and practice. This academy could be the antithesis of elitism if drafted, synthesized and built with certain ideals in mind.
Imagine an institution of higher education where students are taught to live Komives' 5 key components of leadership: That leadership is about being inclusive, empowering, purposeful, process oriented and full of integrity. If Northhouse shares that leadership is a trait, ability, a skill, a behavior and a relationship, imagine what a group of young Americans could do in formally discovering how to live each of these concepts as leaders.
With the incoming U.S. Presidential administration literally creating a new era in America, this United States Public Service Academy could be about taking our best young minds and bodies and teaching them to live a life of HUMILITY and SERVICE to others, changing the face of our nation and the world forever.
This is the time for a U.S. Public Service Academy. This is the time for America to repolish its value system and its purpose in the world. Let us never lose faith and hope in these United States and let us build an academy beyond the military that will represent the best that we can offer humanity, our young leaders.
It will be this new generation, the millennial generation, that will be our saving grace. We need to do all we can to train, develop and prepare them for what lies ahead. The USPSA can not and must not be about elitism, but truly about service and a dedication to humanity, the likes of which we have never seen nor created until now.
As a leadership educator at a large public institution, I 100% support this effort and urge all Americans and any person who believes in freedom to support this cause. Now is the time.
Posted by Dr. Craig Rotter on 12/30/2008 @ 06:02PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
This is a great idea! As a non-profit leader working closely with government, I see every day great public servants, but also a need to elevate the calling of public service and take it seriously as a field. Keep up the great work.
Eric Schwarz, Citizen Schools
Posted by Eric Schwarz on 12/30/2008 @ 07:28PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
Hi all!
I appreciate the passion that this idea provokes! And that alone validates the need to create this institution. America is at a crossroads, one leading to decline, the other to unlimited possibilities for our people and the world. We have been on a decline for the last eight years and now is the time to reverse the course, harness our imaginations, and get to work.
The US Public Service Academy is the very model of excellence in government. And the government is us. It is not some scary entity that rules over the people, we are it and it is us. Why not then, train our citizens to respect and care for our country, rather than complain that nothing is getting done to serve our citizens?
It is a big idea. And we need that kind of American ingenuity to get us back on track now!!
Posted by Justine Hebron on 12/31/2008 @ 08:50AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
The USPSA is a transformational idea whose time has come. It will be a catalyzing force in a long-term movement to restore America's public institutions.
Posted by Alex Quigley on 12/31/2008 @ 10:33AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
This is a great idea!
Posted by Felicity Moller on 12/31/2008 @ 02:35PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
I agree 100% for what had been written by - Chris Myers Asch (Educator), Washington, DC on his articles writing. Thanks to Chris Myers Asch.
Posted by Michael Dadona on 12/31/2008 @ 02:48PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
This is an absurd scheme by an entrepreneurial bunch of educators who mis-understand the basic structure of higher education in America. With a real crisis of financing both public and private tuition, caused in no small part by the entrepeneurialism of Republican speculators in profit-making colleges, and the Bush administration's offer of unlimited access to federally financed college tuition loans, an ever expanding series of nonprofit, public, and private loan originators have filed bankruptcy. See, for just one of several large scale examples, way before the current, broader crisis, the history of TERI (http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/2008/05/13/help-my-student-loan-check-bounced.html).
To create a totally new service academy, with as fuzzy a scheme as that proposed here - and on their web page - while hundreds of colleges are financially in jeopardy and thousands of college students - who would make perfectly fine AmeriCorps volunteers with adequate guarantees on their loans - is profoundly self-involved, selfish, and redundant. It ignores 400 years of philanthropy, no less than thousands of colleges, financial aid systems, and hundreds of varieties of service learning.
To pretend that there is "one way" or even "a better way" for service learning, that it is closely analogous to military academies, and that so many are already doing so much in the same field is ... in very simple and stark terms ... stupid. From the service academies of the churches to those of land grant colleges and even of ITT, this is one very, very unfortunate half-baked scheme of a few to capture the vision of those who know too little about too much.
Posted by Joe Beckmann on 12/31/2008 @ 07:01PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
France has had one of these for quite some time, and it has provided many of their top national leaders. Having other paths than law school preparing people for public leaderships would be a very good thing.
Posted by Pat Gunn on 12/31/2008 @ 07:59PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
This is a great idea and gets my vote.
I don't believe this is being redundant at all. This would be a unique institution where graduates would be highly trained and would dedicate time to work in government service. They are not being coerced or forced into service but would be serving their country for receiving a high quality education.
Posted by Johann Liljengren on 12/31/2008 @ 10:34PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.