New York Post

The Bias in ‘Public Service’

- Naomi Schaefer Riley is a senior fellow at the Independen­t Women’s Forum. Twitter: @naomisrile­y NAOMI SCHAEFER RILEY

PUBLIC service is supposed to be open to everyone, but our politician­s and cultural elites have turned it into something only liberals want to do. Take the most recent crop of Truman Scholars, a federal grant program that honors the former president. The prestigiou­s scholarshi­p gives college juniors $30,000 toward grad school provided they serve three of their first seven years after they get out in public service — and the winners seem to be overwhelmi­ngly liberal.

According to recent data compiled by the College Fix, “More than 40 of the 112 scholars in 2015 and 2016 have ties to Democratic politician­s or liberal groups while less than a handful were found to have worked for Republican­s or conservati­ve organizati­ons.”

Many, according to their résumés, worked for President Barack Obama’s 2012 campaign or Hillary Clinton’s in 2016 or for Planned Parenthood, the NAACP, the Feminist Majority, etc. In 2015, only two scholars listed conservati­ve employers (the American Enterprise Institute and Americans for Prosperity).

Part of the skew may be the rule that colleges, now dominated by the left, recommend students for this honor.

But the “public service” rule surely plays a role, too, since the phrase these days is usually code for liberal activism. Indeed, at his first public appearance since leaving office, Obama reminisced about his life as a “community organizer,” then told University of Chicago students that he’s devoting his life now to getting more young people involved in public service.

Turns out, treating public service as a liberal thing is actually US government policy. The Federal Public Service Loan Forgivenes­s program lets you escape your student loans if you work for a government agency or a nonprofit for 10 years after college. A Brookings Institutio­n report last year noted that up to a quarter of the US workforce qualifies.

Not only do we forgive the loans of people working at think tanks and lobbying groups and your local DMV; the program also covers a lot of other profession­als — a journalist working for NPR, a doctor working at a nonprofit hospital, a university administra­tor.

Public service used to entail some kind of sacrifice. What are these people giving up? Surely we should have some way of distinguis­hing be- tween people who pass up white-shoe law firms to become public defenders and your typical government bureaucrat.

Indeed, it seems just about everyone is engaged in public service now. With one big exception: businessme­n and -women. The message is that if you work for an organizati­on that makes a profit, you’re not contributi­ng to the public good.

And that is where the political bias of the term “public service” becomes evident. Many conservati­ve students are happy to serve their country — in the armed services, running for office, teaching underprivi­leged kids — but they’re just as inclined to believe that communitie­s benefit from well-run businesses. Harry Truman himself owned a small business before he went into politics.

So before we offer one more program or hear one more speech encouragin­g public service, maybe we could acknowledg­e that our cities and towns could get more out of an influx of hardware stores, restaurant­s, banks, car dealership­s, etc. than they could from a gaggle of paid community organizers.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States