TF
Doug Henwood wrote:
> [I'm not sure if I trust anything coming out of Heritage, but this
> does comport with some other research I've seen.]
>
> <http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20051128/cm_usatoday/debunkingthemythoftheunderprivilegedsoldier;_ylt=AlWbZRYvkzY8hd7qSZNWg5us0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3YWFzYnA2BHNlYwM3NDI->
>
>
> Debunking the myth of the underprivileged soldier
> By Tim Kane and James Jay Carafano
> Mon Nov 28, 7:36 AM ET
>
> They all volunteered. The U.S. soldiers pitching in with hurricane
> relief along the Gulf Coast and those fighting and dying in Iraq,
> Afghanistan and elsewhere decided, on their own, to serve their nation.
>
> Or was the decision made so freely? Could it be that unscrupulous
> Pentagon recruiters duped them, taking advantage of their poverty,
> their lack of education and the bleak futures they share as members of
> the USA's urban underclass?
>
> That's the view of some critics, such as New York Times columnist Bob
> Herbert, who writes that "very few" of the soldiers fighting in Iraq
> "are coming from the privileged economic classes," and that there
> would likely be no war if rich kids had to fight. According to Rep.
> Charles Rangel (news, bio, voting record), D-N.Y., social equality
> demands reinstatement of the draft, which he justifies by asserting
> that "the most privileged Americans are underrepresented or absent."
> Herbert concludes that there is "something very, very wrong with this
> picture."
>
> What's "very, very wrong" with the Rangel-Herbert picture is that it
> has no factual basis.
>
> According to a comprehensive study of all enlistees for the years
> 1998-99 and 2003 that The Heritage Foundation just released, the
> typical recruit in the all-volunteer force is wealthier, more educated
> and more rural than the average 18- to 24-year-old citizen is. Indeed,
> for every two recruits coming from the poorest neighborhoods, there
> are three recruits coming from the richest neighborhoods.
>
> Yes, rural areas and the South produced more soldiers than their
> percentage of the population would suggest in 2003. Indeed, four rural
> states - Montana, Alaska, Wyoming and Maine - rank 1-2-3-4 in
> proportion of their 18-24 populations enlisted in the military. But
> this isn't news.
>
> Enlistees have always come from rural areas. Yet a new study, reported
> in The Washington Post earlier this month, suggests that higher
> enlistment rates in rural counties are new, implying a poorer
> military. They err by drawing conclusions from a non-random sample of
> a few counties, a statistically cloaked anecdote. The only accurate
> way to assess military demographics is to consider all recruits.
>
> If, for example, we consider the education of every recruit, 98%
> joined with high-school diplomas or better. By comparison, 75% of the
> general population meets that standard. Among all three-digit ZIP code
> areas in the USA in 2003 (one can study larger areas by isolating just
> the first three digits of ZIP codes), not one had a higher graduation
> rate among civilians than among its recruits.
>
> In fact, since the 9/11 attacks, more volunteers have emerged from the
> middle and upper classes and fewer from the lowest-income groups. In
> 1999, both the highest fifth of the nation in income and the lowest
> fifth were slightly underrepresented among military volunteers. Since
> 2001, enlistments have increased in the top two-fifths of income
> levels but have decreased among the lowest fifth.
>
> Allegations that recruiters are disproportionately targeting blacks
> also don't hold water. First, whites make up 77.4% of the nation's
> population and 75.8% of its military volunteers, according to our
> analysis of Department of Defense data.
>
> Second, we explored the 100 three-digit ZIP code areas with the
> highest concentration of blacks, which range from 24.1% black up to
> 68.6%. These areas, which account for 14.6% of the adult population,
> produced 16.6% of recruits in 1999 and only 14.1% in 2003.
>
> Maintaining the strength and size of our all-volunteer military isn't
> always easy. But Americans step up when their country needs them. To
> suggest the system is failing or exploiting citizens is wrong. And to
> make claims about the nature of U.S. troops to discredit their mission
> ought to be politically out of bounds.
>
> ---
>
> Tim Kane is an Air Force veteran, and James Jay Carafano is an Army
> veteran. Both are research fellows at The Heritage Foundation.
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk