The Military's Passive Enrollment

When the President's Leave No Child Behind education program was passed, it received rave reviews and bi-partisan support. Remember Sen. Ted Kennedy smiling and joking with Dubya, all buddy-buddy?

But one little provision is starting to attract some attention.

Somewhere along the way, the program's authors included a requirement that school districts supply to the military the names and contact information for all male 18-year-old. The rationale is that the military can use the information to better compete against colleges and universities when recruiting high school students. How does this help? Gives 'em an instant database of names so they can call students' homes to make their pitch (just what our households need -- the U.S. government interrupting dinners with telemarketing calls). Students can opt out of the database, but the responsibility is on the student to get, complete and return the form that deletes their names from the school's master list. Unless you know to do this, your name is included.

Now, we're not against military recruiting either on- or off-campus at high schools. They should have the same access to Career Days as any other post-graduation option. But we're struck by a few questions.

• Why does the military need an advantage in recruiting? You can't turn on the TV without seeing military ads. They're more frequent than any ads for the local colleges and universities. So visibility isn't an issue.
• Why the double reporting? Law requires all males to register with Selective Service when they turn 18. The government already has a database with these names, and it grows every day some kid becomes of age.
• Why the stealth route? Companies like utilities have this neat thing they call "passive enrollment." They start a new service (usually with a fee) or start to charge a fee for an existing service, but they don't tell anyone. The only way to avoid the charges is for a diligent customer to call and ask to be dropped from the service. The idea is to slip hidden costs to consumers and make a little dough. So why include this provision that clearly addresses post-graduation options in a program designed to help students while in school, then places the responsibility on students to opt out?

We recently heard a conservative television talk show host throw up a smokescreen about how ungrateful kids are using the First Amendment to be anti-military.

Let's not fall for this emotional deflection.

The issue isn't pro- or anti-military. It's people simply asking, Why this measure in an education program? It's simply people wanting high school students to know they do have an option of opting out and not being part of yet another government database.

© Copyright 2003 Keith Jameson. Last update: 2/7/2003; 7:32:05 AM.