National Public Service Academy Revisited

I made a post Saturday Night on Madam Hillary’s backing for a National Public Service Academy and basically billed it an academy for politicians. One of the supporters of the Academy responded:

Adam,

While I appreciate the publicity that you have brought to the U.S. Public Service Academy, I must disagree with your assessment of the idea. I understand that you may not trust Sen. Clinton and thus you are concerned about the Academy idea, but I urge you to keep an open mind about it until you can learn more.

There is a movement to build the Academy that extends far beyond Sen. Clinton or her campaign. Sen. Clinton has co-sponsored the Senate legislation, but we have bipartisan support — folks like Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Rep. Tom Davis, as well as many military leaders (including the last three superintendents of West Point) are also behind the bill. They certainly are not interested in building a school to develop “Hillary’s aristocrats,” and neither are we.

This is not a Democratic idea, nor is it a Republican idea. It is an American idea. It promises to revitalize our public sector by developing stronger leadership. Why does this idea appeal to conservatives? For a number of reasons:
1) The Academy will make government better, not bigger.

2) The Academy will focus on character, leadership development, and patriotic service.

3) The Academy will challenge American higher education to do more to encourage a sense of duty and civic obligation.

Ironically, our strongest opposition to date generally has come from liberals in higher education who think they already do a fine job of preparing our public leaders. Perhaps you agree with them. We think America deserves better.

I encourage you and your readers to find out more about the movement to build the Public Service Academy by visiting:
http://www.uspublicserviceacademy.org.

Thanks,
Chris Myers Asch

Fair enough. I should note that Chris has been busy in the blogosphere. He also paid a visit to Doug at Right Mind. I took a look at the site and here’s its main focus:

The Academy is dedicated to creating a corps of passionate and patriotic civilian leaders willing to devote themselves to the pursuit of academic excellence, civic engagement, and leadership through public service. The Academy seeks to develop students who pursue the highest ideals of human character and the American values of freedom, democracy, and equal opportunity; strive for individual excellence yet feel a personal responsibility to achieve the common good; and appreciate their rights and uphold their responsibilities as citizens of the United States. As an academic institution, the Academy is committed to free and open inquiry, free expression of ideas, and the pursuit of truth. As a public institution, the Academy strives to connect the classroom and community through a consistent commitment not only to creating knowledge but also to sharing and applying that knowledge to serve the American public and world at large. As a national institution, the Academy endeavors to build a corps of civilian leaders willing and able to confront the challenges that face this country in the future.

Pretty strong words given that the academy is still in the idea stage. Taking a look at the FAQ, here’s what the program means:

 Academy graduates will spend five years serving their nation by working as teachers, park rangers, police officers, border agents, and other critical public service jobs at the local, state, national and even international levels.

The academy will have Freshman of 1300 students each year. The price tag–a tad deceptive:

About 70 cents per American per year. For less than the cost of bus fare, we can build a lasting institution sends a clear message to our young people – public service matters, and it matters enough that we have built a national public university dedicated to it.

I hate it when the price tag is left off, so we don’t see how massive an increase in spending this is. It makes me feel like something being hidden from me. Do the math, .70 x 300,000,000 = $210 million per annum and if you figure an annual 5% budget growth per year (very modest for a college), at the end of ten years, this will be costing $342 million a year.

In addition, it won’t actually solve the problems it purports to solve.  For example, the site makes the point that we’re projected to need 2 million more teachers in the next decade. If classes started Fall, 2008, ten years from that point, we’d have about 9,000 graduates.

Now, I hate to splash cold water on this idea (not that this blog can singlehandedly defeat it) because it’s really a grassroots idea from two guys with a dream. But fellas, we’re pushing up a $200 billion deficit and a national debt heading into $10 trillion. This falls into the, “Wouldn’t it be nice.” category of spending that you don’t indulge in with the country’s current situation.