Certainly I’m not arguing for doing that, and at a minimum tight controls would need to be in place to ensure that work didn’t involve political activities. Whether work can be said to be “ideological” is perhaps another matter.

Also, we’ve reached 100 comments on this and I’m going to open a new thread momentarily on national service, after which I’ll close comments on this one and people should continue the discussion at the other.

These feel like straw-man arguments to me, but maybe I’m just not familiar with advocates for those positions.

The reason I said “most” college students was precisely because I realize there are some students who are so stretched, with the need to work long hours, that they can’t volunteer even 6 or 7 hours a year.

As for Obama’s proposal, he isn’t suggesting a $4,000 tax credit in exchange for community service work. The tax credit is for higher education, and an additional requirement would be a minimum of community service.

That would depend on what the definition of “volunteer work” is, wouldn’t it?

Does the time someone gives at the local “Committee to Overthrow the Government” office qualify as “volunteering?” Does the person who marches in protests against abortion qualify as “volunteering?” Does some part time college student who works full time, and then comes home to babysit their siblings while the parent goes to work the night shift qualify as “volunteering?” What about the kid who wants to help a local small grocery store and volunteers his time there because the owner can’t afford another person?

The point I am trying to make is that if someone is going to have to define the causes for which someone can volunteer, that definition is going to be based on their moral standards and not the standards of the person volunteering.

If the idea of the program is to help the community and expose the students to as many ideas and challenges as possible, what the student wants to experience may not be the same as someone sitting in a Washington office.

The second problem is that “volunteering” loses some luster when the person is being compensated for it. Whether that compensation is in the form of a requirement to pass a grade, get out of college, or a tax break, it is still compensation.

Lastly, in the Obama proposal (and I know you are against it) there is something wrong with a person working 100 hours and receiving a $4000 tax credit. That breaks down to $40 an hour, which is a pretty nice piece of change. There is something morally wrong, in my opinion, to someone who is being compensated more per hour for “volunteering” than someone who is bringing home $30,000 a year.