HOME / chatterbox: Gossip, speculation, and scuttlebutt about politics.

Dubya: Closet Neolib?

Timothy NoahPosted Wednesday, Feb. 28, 2001, at 6:26 PM ET

The Corporation for National Service, parent organization to AmeriCorps, the national youth service organization created by the Clinton administration, gets $733 million in the new Bush budget. Counting inflation, this is roughly a 6 percent decrease from the current fiscal year. Given efforts in past years by the Republican Congress to kill the program, a 6 percent decrease is pretty good. The Corporation for National Service has issued a triumphant press release emphasizing that the budget explicitly pledges to fund 50,000 AmeriCorps members, which happens to be the number AmeriCorps was already aiming for.

RSS

So why is George W. Bush lending his support to a program so closely identified with the Big Creep? Because he likes AmeriCorps. He endorsed AmeriCorps during the campaign, even as he attacked Gore for wanting to expand it. (More precisely, Bush attacked Gore for not saying how he would pay for his proposed AmeriCorps expansion.) AmeriCorps jibes well with Bush's "compassionate conservatism," and it will probably play an important role in Bush's high-profile plan to assist faith-based charities. Indeed, there's reason to suspect that AmeriCorps will fare better under Bush than it did under Clinton. "AmeriCorps was always this program off in the corner," explains Steven Waldman, who served as senior adviser to AmeriCorps CEO Harris Wofford in the mid-'90s. "We tried, but we could never get Clinton to view AmeriCorps as part of whatever the big policy reform was. Can you recall an AmeriCorps component to health care reform?" By contrast, Bush has made AmeriCorps a key component to his high-profile plan to assist faith-based charities. Former Indianapolis Mayor Stephen Goldsmith, whom Bush has designated to become chairman of the Corporation for National Service's board, is also overseeing John DiIulio's new White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. Goldsmith was one of Bush's top advisers during the campaign. The board already includes Marc Racicot, the former Montana governor who was briefly considered to be Bush's attorney general. Clinton tended not to put close political associates on the board.

All this will likely prove extremely galling to conservatives who see AmeriCorps as another Vista that pays so-called volunteers to incite the poor to liberal activism. (In fact, Vista is now a part of AmeriCorps.) These days, AmeriCorps is cannily emphasizing the large role religiously affiliated organizations already play in the program. AmeriCorps' acting CEO, Wendy Zenker, told Chatterbox that the Catholic Network of Volunteer Service has the largest number of AmeriCorps members working for it, with Habitat for Humanity not far behind. Overall, Zenker figures that more than 10 percent of AmeriCorps members are currently working on faith-based projects.

As Chatterbox observed in an earlier item, the shrewd way to kill off AmeriCorps would be to shift its spending to small organizations that are likely to do a terrible job of bookkeeping. This would no doubt produce enough horror stories to fuel a lurid congressional hearing. Leslie Lenkowsky, who sits on the AmeriCorps board, made just this suggestion in the Jan. 22 Weekly Standard, prompting Chatterbox to accuse Lenkowsky of trying to kill AmeriCorps. In an e-mail pasted on to the bottom of that earlier item, Lenkowsky vehemently denied this. In any event, there will probably be some movement to funnel AmeriCorps dollars away from big groups like Habitat for Humanity and toward little groups in strategically placed various congressional districts.

Chatterbox predicts that the big groups will make such a stink about this that it won't happen. Which is good, because Chatterbox would like to see AmeriCorps thrive. Although the new emphasis on faith-based charity makes Chatterbox a tad uncomfortable (he's an atheist), he'll throw in his lot with France's King Henry IV and concede that AmeriCorps vaut bien une messe.

E-mail Timothy Noah at .

E-MAIL

RECOMMEND... Get Slate RSS Feeds

Timothy Noah is a senior writer at Slate.

COMMENTS

Reader Comments From The Fray:

As a former Chief of Staff at the Corporation for National Service, I am delighted with the attention Chatterbox has been paying to AmeriCorps during the transition. Let me add a few thoughts...

First, in fairness, AmeriCorps was a crucial element in two of President Clinton's major policy initiatives in the second term--the literacy campaign called America Reads and the efforts to close the digital divide. AmeriCorps members have contributed and are still contributing to each of these presidential initiatives. That said, your basic point that the Clinton Administration didn't continually see and use service as a strategy to achieve policy objectives is unfortunately true. This may or may not be connected to the political challenges surrounding AmeriCorps.

Second, I agree with Chatterbox that AmeriCorps may thrive more under Bush. At least so far, President Bush has been very interested in a general approach to solving problems and the vehicles that should be used. Citizen service, civic organizations and faith-based institutions are at the heart of Bush's approach. Where Clinton was interested in policies, new program initiatives, new budget investments, and service, Bush seems more interested in finding the right mechanism and inspiration. AmeriCorps fits right in line with his belief in "citizens, not spectators," and with his emphasis on faith institutions and community initiatives.

Third, to his credit, Bush does not appear to be particularly concerned with AmeriCorps' parentage. Just as President Clinton genuinely liked the Points of Light Foundation (even though many Democrats wanted to do away with it), I think that President Bush genuinely likes AmeriCorps (even though many Republicans probably would like to do away with it.) AmeriCorps is administered by Governors, and President Bush saw the benefits of AmeriCorps in Texas...and the Governors in the Cabinet--Thompson and Whitman--were also enthusiastic...

In fact, the AmeriCorps "fight" was largely confined to Washington. Republican Members of Congress seemed more concerned about who started AmeriCorps than the benefits that AmeriCorps members were providing in their districts...[More recently] the vocal opponents have found themselves on the margins. Now, attacking a program that President Bush is endorsing is not a very appealing option for these AmeriCorps adversaries.

So the political environment for President Bush to make AmeriCorps part of his plans could hardly be better. All indications are that he will seize this opportunity. President Bush will be a winner, deservedly so. President Clinton will be a winner, also deservedly so, as the wisdom of AmeriCorps idea is affirmed and extended by the new President.

--John Gomperts

(To reply, click here.)

The analogy here is the political impact of religious movements. I don't doubt that Henri IV truly believed that it was "worth a Mass" to be King of France. By the same logic, I suspect that while anti-Catholicism appeared to be a viable route to the throne, Henri was an ardent Calvinist.

What must be remembered is that the Reformation had just as much to do with "political reformation" as it did with "religious reformation". To the extent that our own political conservatives are willing to use religion to further their political agendas, they are as guilty of manipulation of "the people" as the German princes were when the supported Luther.

To compromise one's own beliefs in pursuit of political gain is bad enough. For us to allow it in the hopes of some common good is unacceptable.

--Tony Adragna

(To reply, click here.)

What did you think of this article?

Join The Fray: Our Reader Discussion Forum

POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES