Mandatory National Service
Mandatory national service (also called compulsory service) is a requirement, generally issued by the federal government, that people serve in the military or complete other works of service, most often as young people, but age requirements vary. Modern propositions for compulsory service in the United States include young Americans serving in the military or working on civilian projects such as teaching in low-income areas, helping care for the elderly, or maintaining infrastructure, among other ideas.[2]
Proposals in the United States to implement compulsory service trace back to the 1800s. Perhaps the most popular early proposal can be found in the novel Looking Backward (1888) by journalist Edward Bellamy. In what would now be called a “utopian fantasy,” Bellamy imagines a society in which mandatory service “is regarded as so absolutely natural and reasonable that the idea of its being compulsory has ceased to be thought of.”[44][45]
In 1906 American philosopher and psychologist William James, while arguing for pacifism, suggested the conscription of men for service not in the military but in civic, social, and humanitarian programs: “The military ideals of hardihood and discipline would be wrought into the growing fiber of the people; no one would remain blind, as the luxurious classes now are blind, to man’s relations to the globe he lives on and to the permanently sour and hard foundations of his higher life. To coal and iron mines, to freight trains, to fishing fleets in December, to dishwashing, clothes-washing, and window-washing, to road-building and tunnel-making, to foundries and stoke-holes, and to the frames of skyscrapers would our gilded youths be drafted off, according to their choice, to get the childishness knocked out of them, and to come back into society with healthier sympathies and soberer ideas. They would have paid their blood tax, done their own part in the immemorial human warfare against nature; they would tread the earth more proudly, the women would value them more highly, they would be better fathers and teachers of the following generation.”[46]
More recently, between 2003 and 2013, former U.S. Representative Charles Rangel (D-NY) made five unsuccessful attempts to pass the Universal National Service Act, which would have required all people in the United States between ages 18 and 42 to either serve in the military or perform civilian service specifically related to national defense. [1][34]
The Universal National Service Act reflects what most think of when faced with the phrase “mandatory national service”: the military draft. Also called conscription, the draft was created during the Civil War and is one type of mandatory national service. During the Civil War the Union Army draft was controversial, resulting in the Draft Riot of 1863. As Encyclopaedia Britannica explains, “Although labouring people in general supported the Northern war effort, they had no voice in Republican policy and occasionally deserted from the army or refused reenlistment. Because of their low wages, often less than $500 a year, they were particularly antagonized by the federal provision allowing more affluent draftees to buy their way out of the Federal Army for $300. Minor riots occurred in several cities, and when the drawing of names began in New York on July 11, 1863, mobs (mostly of foreign-born, especially Irish, workers) surged onto the streets, assaulting residents, defying police, attacking draft headquarters, and burning buildings. Property damage eventually totaled $1,500,000.”[41][42]
The draft was suspended with the end of the Civil War in 1865 and was not reinstated until shortly after the United States entered World War I in April 1917. Because the American military only had about 100,000 men, conscription was needed for American participation in the war. President Woodrow Wilson signed the Selective Service Act on May 18, 1917, and about 2.8 million men were drafted. The draft initially required all men aged 21 to 30 to enroll, but it was expanded to all men aged 18 to 45.[41]
Now, all male U.S. citizens ages 18 to 25 must simply register with the Selective Service. However, the United States has had an all-volunteer army and has not drafted men into the military since 1973; in the 1960s and ’70s, some 2.2 million men were drafted into the military during the Vietnam War. For more on the U.S. Selective Service Acts, visit Encyclopaedia Britannica. [35][35][37]
Many countries require national military service of some or all citizens, including Brazil, Greece, Iran, Israel, North Korea, Russia, Singapore, South Korea, Thailand, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Requirements for each country vary; in Israel, for example, military service is mandatory for women, too.[43]
While the United States has never had a national service mandate other than selective military service, the closest analogues are jury duty and volunteer organizations like the Peace Corps and Teach for America.
Globally, a few countries have nonmilitary national service. Nigeria has a social mandatory service requirement for college graduates: the National Youth Service Corps. Established on May 22, 1973, the corps was created after the Nigerian Civil War (also called the Nigerian-Biafran War) for rebuilding the country. In Rwanda the last Saturday of every month is called Umuganda (meaning “coming together in common purpose”), a compulsory community cleanup event for everyone aged 18 to 65, enforced by police; the country, as a result, is widely considered one of the cleanest in Africa. [47][48]
U.S. public opinion on mandatory national service is split but changing, moving in favor of mandatory service. In a 2013 poll, 59% of younger voters ages 18 to 39 strongly opposed such a system. In a 2017 Gallop Poll, 57% of 18- to 29-year-olds opposed mandatory service. But in 2023 survey, 75% of young people aged 18–24—those most affected by the proposal—supported an 18-month mandatory national service program (if they received compensation for their service, free room and board during their service, and could choose from either civilian or military service options).[3]
So, should the United States enact mandatory national service?
(This article first appeared on ProCon.org and was last updated on Oct. 27, 2024.)
| PROS | CONS |
|---|---|
| Pro 1: Mandatory service provides a much-needed bridge to adulthood and maturity. Read More. | Con 1: Volunteerism is a better experience than mandatory service. Read More. |
| Pro 2: National security concerns require that more Americans serve their country. Read More. | Con 2: Mandatory service results in draft dodging and an unfair burden on low-income and minority citizens. Read More. |
| Pro 3: Mandatory service fosters national unity and a greater sense of purpose. Read More. | Con 3: Mandatory service infringes on Americans’ constitutional right to liberty. Read More. |
Pro Arguments
(Go to Con Arguments)Pro 1: Mandatory service provides a much-needed bridge to adulthood and maturity.
“Many of today’s young people are floundering. They are uncertain about what they want to do with their lives. They need a structured opportunity that will allow them to feel needed and capable,” explains Isabel V. Sawhill, senior fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution. [28]
Compulsory military or social service would allow all young people to pursue personal development before starting college, entering the workforce, or otherwise managing adulthood. They would learn discipline and a healthier way of living. They would gain real-world skills while learning to socialize with diverse people from diverse backgrounds, breeding greater social understanding and empathy. [25][26][29]
98% of students who took a “gap year” between high school and college reported that the deferment helped their personal development, and 97% said it increased their maturity. Gap-year students also tend to have higher GPAs than their peers. [25][26][26]
“We know that we as a society need these services. I would argue that young Americans would be given a sense of maturity and competence by providing them,” argues Paula S. Fass, history professor emerita at the University of California at Berkeley. She advocates for 18- to 21-year-olds to complete two years of service either in the armed forces or in needy communities. [27]
Pro 2: National security concerns require that more Americans serve their country.
The U.S. military is suffering a years-long staffing crisis. Only about 9% of Americans who are service-aged were interested in serving in 2022, the lowest amount in 15 years. [50]
The Army missed its recruiting goal by 15,000 people in 2022 and is on target to miss 2023’s goal by 20,000.[50][51]
“The risk is if the US military is too small to conduct the kinds of missions that it needs to conduct in future wars, that will go badly for the United States,” explains Nora Bensahel, senior fellow of the Merrill Center at Johns Hopkins. [50]
The military being a “family business” exacerbates the recruitment shortages. Less than 1% of the U.S. population is in the military and almost 80% of new recruits had family already in the military. That means most Americans are completely disconnected from service. Michelle Kurilla, a research associate at the Council on Foreign Relations, questions whether “it’s healthy for a democracy to have the vast majority of its citizens with little connection to its armed forces.” [50]
Former Marine Elliot Ackerman asks, “But could we blame civilians for their apathy? No one asked them to care about the wars. How to make them care? [One] answer was the draft. It’s become mine too.”[52]
Moreover, “A truly American military, inclusive of all social classes, might cause politicians and voters to be more selective in choosing which battles are worth fighting and at what expense,” argues former draftee Joseph Epstein. “It would also have the significant effect of getting the majority of the country behind those wars in which we do engage.” [54]
Finally, for those who are “unfit” to serve in the military, countless opportunities exist to support national defense in nonphysically demanding ways, from serving in disaster preparedness to aiding the Red Cross and United Service Organizations (USO). With global threats only growing stronger, the U.S. needs both a stronger, larger military force and a stronger connection between American citizens and national service.
Pro 3: Mandatory service fosters national unity and a greater sense of purpose.
“National service, be it in the military, Peace Corps, or other public or private sector opportunities, breaks down the barriers of race, class, income, geography, and even language. Young adults are granted the opportunity to see their peers and fellow Americans as a member of their team,” according to Dan Glickman, former U.S. Representative (D-KS). [5]
Around 30 countries have compulsory military service. Switzerland, which has four official languages and three major ethnic groups, bridges its divides with a mandatory national service program. The country is identified as one of the happiest places in the world by the United Nations.[6][7]
Gene Yaw, a Republican Pennsylvania state senator, recommended a two-year universal public service requirement to promote civility and understanding of what it means to be an American. “We cannot generate enthusiasm for our way of life when less than 2% of our population has put forth any effort for our country.” [8]
Steve Cohen, an attorney and a former member of the board of directors of the United States Naval Institute, and the person who sponsored the 2023 survey cited above that found that 75% of young people would now support some kind of mandatory national service, echoed this need for greater national unity. “Sixty-five percent of all those polled think the country is too divided and would benefit from a common experience,” he reported. [55]
Con Arguments
(Go to Pro Arguments)Con 1: Volunteerism is a better experience than mandatory service.
A whopping 80% of young Americans are “unfit” to serve in the military in 2023 because of drug use, weight, or other mental and physical ailments.[49]
Conscripting unfit or unwilling people into the military would make the armed forces less efficient. Michael Lind, cofounder and fellow at the New America Foundation, states, “Most members of the military are satisfied with our professional soldiers and do not want to baby-sit teenagers who will leave the military after six months or two years of unsought, compulsory training.” We should not leave our national security to sulky young people who would rather do anything else. [14]
Volunteers, however, are happier. 28% of millennials have volunteered for a total of 1.5 billion community service hours annually. And 26% of Gen Z, mostly just young kids at the time of the survey, said they already volunteered and 50% would like a job in volunteerism.[29][30]
There are limitless volunteer opportunities throughout the country for willing young people to help others and mature into adulthood. For example, since AmeriCorps was founded in 1993, over 800,000 participants have completed more than one billion service hours. Applications outpace funding and capacity, and there are 15 qualified would-be volunteers for every available AmeriCorps spot. [10][11][12][13]
Con 2: Mandatory service results in draft dodging and an unfair burden on low-income and minority citizens.
“The Vietnam-era draft. . .drew disproportionately from those of low socioeconomic backgrounds, while the children of the wealthy and influential were able to finagle exceptions.…[D]raft boards across the country were required to call up men with IQ scores below the military’s minimum standards to offset the recruitment deficit caused by college student deferments,” says former Marine Elliot Ackerman. [52]
The problem did not begin with the Vietnam War, but with the beginning of the American draft itself, explains Deseret News: “Through the ages, the wealthy sought for ways out, including unjustified medical exemptions, while the poor tended to have few alternatives. The nation’s first draft was during the Civil War. Wealthy draftees at the time could pay someone to substitute for them, or they could pay $300 for an exemption.” [53]
Any compulsory service programs “will be gamed by the wealthy, the well-connected, the folks with the social capital to figure out how things work—and national service will be set up in a way that serves their ends and reflects their values and preferences,” says Conor Friedersdorf, staff writer at The Atlantic. [32]
Also, a period of mandatory service could be a hardship for families and communities that would lose the young people who are already performing service by contributing to household income, babysitting for neighbors, or caring for sick relatives.[33][34]
Compulsory service would also delay people’s entry into the workforce, resulting in significant lost earnings that for some are desperately needed to keep multiple generations of a family afloat. [33][34]
“Think of the aspiring athlete or entertainer who has only so many years in her prime, the talented coder who might have to pass up a big market opportunity or the young worker who cannot take a year off from helping to feed his family,” notes The Washington Post. [13]
Con 3: Mandatory service infringes on Americans’ constitutional right to liberty.
“Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States,” states the 13th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. [22]
While the government has the authority to “raise and support Armies,” there is no constitutional basis for compelling citizens to perform public service. “Mandatory universal national service, at least if legally required and backed by civil or criminal penalties, would fit the definition of involuntary servitude,” says Doug Bandow, lawyer and senior fellow at the Cato Institute. [1][23]
“Since people are now free to live and work where they want, one presumes participation in a National Service Program would be mandatory under the threat of a prison sentence,” adds Stuart Anderson, executive director of the National Foundation for American Policy. “A National Service Program that takes two years out of the lives of young people (or others) contravenes the most important part of America, what has drawn people to its shores for centuries—individual liberty.” [24]
Discussion Questions
- Should the United States have mandatory national service? Why or why not?
- If you had to complete mandatory national service, what sort of service would you like to enroll in? Explain your answer(s).
- Should military service be mandatory? Explain your answer.
Take Action
- Analyze the arguments from Lilliana Mason and Eric Liu in favor of mandatory national service.
- Explore the debate via readers’ letters to America: The Jesuit Review.
- Consider Doug Bandow’s arguments against mandatory national service.
- Consider how you felt about the issue before reading this article. After reading the pros and cons on this topic, has your thinking changed? If so, how? List two to three ways. If your thoughts have not changed, list two to three ways your better understanding of the “other side of the issue” now helps you better argue your position.
- Push for the position and policies you support by writing U.S. senators and representatives.
Sources
- Doug Bandow, “Mandatory Universal National Service: A Dystopian Vision for a Free Society,” cato.org, Feb. 21, 2019
- Thomas Ricks, “Let’s Draft Our Kids,” nytimes.com, July 10, 2012
- Jim Norman, “Half of Americans Favor Mandatory National Service,” news.gallup.com, Nov. 10, 2017
- Pew Research Center, “The Partisan Divide on Political Values Grows Even Wider,” people-press.org, Oct. 5, 2017
- Dan Glickman, “National Service Can Unite America,” thehill.com, Oct. 29, 2018
- Sharon Omondi, “Countries with Mandatory Military Service,” worldatlas.com, Sep. 6, 2017
- The Panetta Institute, “The Case for National Service,” panettainstitute.org, July 2017
- Gene Yaw, “To Unite Us, America Should Require Mandatory Public Service,” pennlive.com, Apr. 3, 2018
- Bill Chappell, “Should Young Americans Be Required To Do Public Service? Federal Panel Says Maybe,” npr.org, Jan. 23, 2019
- Alia E. Dastagir, “Pete Buttigieg Wants a National Service Program. Could It Heal a Divided Country?,” usatoday.com, Apr. 17, 2019
- VolunteerAR, “About AmeriCorps,” volunteerar.org (accessed Apr. 22, 2019)
- Associated Press, “National Service Bill Gets Obama’s Signature,” nbcnews.com, Apr. 21, 2009
- The Washington Post Editorial Board, “National Service for Young People Should Be Encouraged — but Not Required,” washingtonpost.com, Sep. 18, 2016
- Michael Lind, “No, America Doesn’t Need a National Service,” salon.com, July 10, 2012
- Nolan Feeney, “Pentagon: 7 in 10 Youths Would Fail to Qualify for Military Service,” June 29, 2014
- John Hickenlooper, “Invest in What Works: National Service,” nationswell.com, Nov. 2, 2017
- Clive Belfield, “The Economic Value of National Service,” voicesforservice.org, Sep. 2013
- Joseph Gersen, “Senate Hearing 113-82,” govinfo.gov, July 25, 2013
- Policy Studies Associates, “Study Overview Analysis of the Impacts of City Year’s Whole School Whole Child Model on Partner Schools’ Performance,” cityyear.org, 2015
- Stanley McChrystal, “Every American Should Serve For One Year,” time.com, June 20, 2017
- Michigan Community Service Commission, “AmeriCorps Urban Safety Program,” michigan.gov (accessed Apr. 22, 2019)
- History.com Editors, “13th Amendment,” history.com, Apr. 15, 2019
- Ilya Somin, “Why Mandatory National Service is Both Unjust and Unconstitutional,” reason.com, Oct. 19, 2018
- Stuart Anderson, “Mandatory ‘National Service’ for New York Times Columnists,” forbes.com, Jan. 31, 2012
- Nina Hoe, “American Gap Association National Alumni Survey,” gapyearassociation.org, May 2, 2016
- Bob Clagett, “Bob Clagett on Taking a Gap Year,” collegeadmissionbook.com, Mar. 20, 2013
- Paula S. Fass, “Young Americans Need Required National Service,” blog.press.princeton.edu, Mar. 2, 2016
- Isabel V. Sawhill, “It’s Time to Make National Service a Universal Commitment,” brookings.edu, Nov. 30, 2017
- Lawrence White, “The Case for Mandatory National Service,” blog.timesunion.com, Mar. 3, 2014
- Libby Nelson, “The Real College Admissions Scandal Is What’s Legal,” vox.com, Mar. 12, 2019
- Nick Visser, “John McCain Slams Wealthy Draft Dodgers in Apparent Swipe at Trump,” huffpost.com, Oct. 23, 2017
- Conor Friedersdorf, “The Case Against Universal National Service,” theatlantic.com, June 26, 2013
- Randi Hjalmarsson and Matthew Lindquist, “What Are the Effects of Mandatory Military Conscription on Crime and the Labour Market?,” voxeu.org, Apr. 2, 2016
- GovTrack, “H.R. 5741 (111th): Universal National Service Act,” govtrack.us, Feb. 3, 2013
- History.com Editors, “Conscription,” history.com, Aug. 21, 2018
- Andrew Glass, “U.S. Military Draft Ends, Jan. 27, 1973,” politico.com, Jan. 27, 2012
- Sean Mclain Brown, “Should the United States Reinstate the Draft?,” military.com, May 17, 2018
- Rwanda Governance Board, “Impact Assessment of Umuganda 2007-2016,” rgb.rw, Oct. 2017
- Classy.org, “Gen Z: The Next Generation of Donors,” classy.org (accessed July 8, 2021)
- Kim Strong, “71% of Young People Are Ineligible for the Military — and Most Careers, Too,” usatoday.com
- Michael Ray, “Selective Service Acts,” britannica.com, May 11, 2023
- Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica, “Draft Riot of 1863,” britannica.com, July 4, 2023
- CIA, “World Factbook: Military Service Age and Obligation,” cia.gov (accessed July 25, 2023)
- Warren Sloat, “Looking Back at ‘Looking Backward’: We Have Seen the Future and It Didn’t Work,” nytimes.com, Jan. 17, 1988
- Doug Bandow, “Mandatory Universal National Service: A Dystopian Vision for a Free Society,” cato.org, Feb. 21, 2019
- William James, “Proposing the Moral Equivalent of War,” laphamsquarterly.org, 1906
- National Youth Service Corps, nysc.gov.ng (accessed July 25, 2023)
- Amy Yee, “How Rwanda Tidied up Its Streets (and the Rest of the Country, Too),” npr.org, July 18, 2018
- Leroy Triggs, “80% of Americans Ages 17 to 24 Are Unfit for Military Service,” ksnblocal4.com, Mar. 19, 2023
- Michelle Kurilla, “The President’s Inbox Recap: The U.S. Military Recruiting Crisis,” cfr.org, June 16, 2023
- Doug G. Ware, “Army Secretary Says Recruiting Troubles Are ‘Very Serious’ and Fixing Them Could Stretch into 2024,” stripes.com, Feb. 23, 2023
- Elliot Ackerman, “Why Bringing Back the Draft Could Stop America’s Forever Wars,” time.com, Oct. 10, 2019
- Deseret News Editorial Board, “Opinion: Volunteer Armed Forces Protect American Freedom Valiantly,” deseret.com, May 28, 2023
- Joseph Epstein, “How I Learned to Love the Draft,” theatlantic.com, January/February 2015
- Steve Cohen, “Americans Support Mandatory National Service,” The Hill, Oct. 15, 2023