Clinton Tuition Plan Will Find Foe in Military

By Pat Elder

Military recruiting will face its greatest threat since the end of conscription in 1973 if Hillary Clinton’s plan calling for free in-state tuition is enacted into law. Already, recruiting has become extraordinarily tough for the Pentagon, thanks largely to generally improving economic conditions.  Meanwhile, the Pentagon has been noticeably silent on the issue and sticks to its narrative that youth sign up for patriotic reasons.

According to the Clinton website, “Tuition has ballooned out of control and has become increasingly unaffordable even at public colleges and universities.”   Tuition has risen by nearly half in the last decade at four-year public colleges and universities, after inflation, while family incomes have remained stagnant.

Under the Clinton plan, every student from a family making $85,000 a year or less will be able to attend a 4-year public college or university tuition-free. This threshold will increase by $10,000 a year every year over the next four years so that by 2021, all students with a family income of $125,000 will have the opportunity to attend college for free. Students will be expected to work 10 hours a week to help defray the full cost of attendance.

This is a nightmare scenario for the U.S. Military Entrance Processing Command (USMEPCOM) which has adopted a national recruiting playbook based largely on convincing youth to enlist through promises of free college tuition once they get out.  It makes sense, considering that 75% of veterans say they joined to receive educational benefits.

Under the Post 9/11 GI Bill, soldiers can earn full tuition to the college of their choice for up to 36 months, plus a monthly housing allowance that averages about $1300 a monthand a books and supplies stipend of up to $1,000 per year. These soldiers must have been honorably discharged and completed 36 months of continuous active duty.

If the free tuition plan is enacted, it will become extraordinarily tough for recruiters to sell typical mandatory 8-year enlistments based on a GI Bill education benefits, in effect, limited to a housing and book fee stipend.

Marketing the Post 9/11 GI Bill and other education-related benefits, like the Concurrent Admissions Program, (ConAp)which allows soldiers to earn credit toward a college degree while serving, will lose its appeal overnight.  Similarly, the Reserve Officer Training Corps Program, (ROTC)a full scholarship program that allows students to complete the requirements of officer training while attending college – in return for eight years of military service – will take a hit.   The Reserves will also suffer. For instance, the Army Reserve promises those who serve at least 90 days, but less than six months of active duty, are entitled to 40% of the Post 9/11 GI Bill.  It would become a worthless promise with the passage of Clinton’s free tuition plan.  Likewise, the Spouse Education and Career Opportunities program  (SECO)used by recruiters to sweeten enlistment deals that involve skeptical partners, will also lose its appeal.

The Army’s Recruiter Handbook instructs recruiters on the psychology of their trade and encourages them to exploit a potential recruit’s inability to afford college. Consider this excerpt:

College-bound students who planned on continuing their education will discover the realities of tuition and book fees. Recruiting unit leaders must develop a prospecting plan that will identify and capitalize on these decision points as they occur. For some students, it is clear that college is not an option, at least for now. Let them know how the Army can help them fulfill their college aspirations.

The handbook includes several suggested scripts for recruiters making cold calls that attempt to convince potential recruits by promising to pay for college, like this one:

John, the Army has some dynamic programs that offer guaranteed skill training and educational assistance for college. I would like to meet with you to discuss how these programs can help you reach your goals. How about meeting with me at _______ or ________? Which would be better for you?

Promising free college is the cornerstone of military recruiting and it courses through every level of the Pentagon’s pitch. The walls of the nation’s high schools are plastered with glossy military posters promising help with paying for college. Recruiting stations push the same, while the military’s websites and social media presence focus on the educational benefits of military service.

The recruiting command is not known to cry uncle, although we can anticipate the Pentagon to position itself to gain even greater access to children in the nation’s high schools. For instance, Maj. Gen. Jeffrey Snow, Commander of Army Recruiting, claims that half of all high schools fail to provide access to Army recruiters. The claim is ludicrous considering that providing recruiter access is tied to schools receiving federal aid. Snow’s made-up statistic provides insight into the recruiting command’s playbook going forward, without the attractive promise of free or reduced tuition.  

If American youth don’t have to pay for college, we can expect the Pentagon to respond by further infiltrating high school campuses across the country to target students not interested in furthering their education. The brass may be expected to demand complete access to the educational records of all high school students.  The DOD already manages to circumvent federal law by giving the ASVAB, its enlistment test, to 700,000 high school kids while using results on most for recruiting purposes without parental consent. The military may also demand regular access to office space for recruiters to assist with their recruiting duties. 

The military will be forced to grovel for the relatively few recruits it needs to sustain an even smaller force and it will need unfettered access to high school students to meet the demand, unless conditions in the military improve dramatically and the prevailing negative attitudes regarding military service among overwhelming numbers of youth and their families begin to change.

Military recruiting in the United States is despicable public policy involving tens of thousands of American government employees both in and out of active duty whose job it is to persuade high school kids to enlist in the Armed Services.  It is an extraordinarily deceptive and reprehensible psychological pursuit.  The Pentagon says we have a volunteer force, but it is actually a recruited force.

Why is recruiting so tough? Consider these statistics:

·      The Army admits nearly 40% of all Army enlistees never complete their first term. Imagine, for a moment, the emotional suffering endured by those who really didn’t “volunteer” in the first place.

·      The Army also admits there were more than 20,000 deserters from the Army alone during the period from 2006 to 2014 and that only a fraction were prosecuted.

·      According to USA Today half of the 770,000 active-duty soldiers polled two years ago “have little satisfaction in - or commitment to their jobs.”

·      The Army Medical Department Medical Journal reports that Musculoskeletal injuries in the military result in 2.2 million medical encounters yearly, while there are 1.3 million active-duty soldiers.

·      Nearly half of the 1.6 million veterans of the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have filed injury claims.

·      Military suicides are at or near an all-time high.

·      Sexual assaults are at or near record levels in the military.

Although Maj. Gen. Snow often says it’s a myth to suggest the Army is a last resort for many, it will certainly become a last resort for increasing numbers who may be given the opportunity to attend college for free.

Pat Elder is the Director of the National Coalition to Protect Student Privacy, www.studentprivacy.org