Posted on Nov 19, 2018
Americans must share the consequences of our wars
116K
642
193
287
287
0
In 2014, I shared the story of an encounter I had on an airplane with a United States military veteran named Tim. He had overheard a fellow passenger suggest that the challenges facing some veterans after 9/11 were “fake news” and unlike during the Vietnam era. “America supports its veterans,” the woman said. Tim then shared his experience after serving in the Marine Corps in Afghanistan. He tried college, but it never stuck. He was battling with Veterans Affairs, and he was unable to find a job.
But then Tim said something that gave me goosebumps. “Worse than all that, now at home, I feel anonymous,” he told told us. Home among the very people who sent him to fight and kill our enemies, Tim feels invisible. For years, our elected leaders have debated strategies to end our wars after 9/11. However, only a brave few have acknowledged that until the costs and consequences of war are equitably shared by all Americans, our wars will drag on, military conflict will remain too painless a pursuit, and the experiment of an all volunteer military will fail us as a nation.
Three truths inform this proposition. First, our wars after 9/11 are not initially funded, at least in part, by taxpayers. Instead, the $5 trillion and growing cost has been largely paid on credit. Second, an exceedingly small number of Americans have directly shouldered the burden, and those who do serve are increasingly not representative of the citizenry. Finally, the assumption we have a ready pool of volunteers is becoming a myth. An estimated 70 percent of American youth are ineligible to volunteer, and the willingness of high school students to consider military service is at a record low. This could explain why the United States Army missed its recruiting goals this year for the first time since 2005.
Most agree that a military composed entirely of volunteers is superior to a conscripted force. However, many also acknowledge that this type of system is beginning to show cracks. Some of those cracks stem from fielding military members separate and apart from those who benefit from a safe and prosperous nation. The worst fears of those who architected the all volunteer military included a concern that because only “some” would shoulder the burdens of war, then war as an instrument of foreign policy would become too easy. They also feared that when those who fight come home, they would be cast as a government problem.
More than four decades and several wars later, I would describe these fears as prophetic. Since 1973, the United States has used military force on more than 220 occasions. Alternatively, in the 45 years prior when a draft was the law of the land, the United States leveraged military force as an instrument of foreign policy on just 24 occasions. Some of this contrast can rightfully be attributed to an complex global security situation, but it is also likely true that when you do not have to pay the bill, and when it is not your child being compelled to fight our battles, war is too easy.
Why do those who volunteer come home and cite lack of connection to civilian society? It is because after 17 years of war, we have discounted the foundational assumption sustaining the all volunteer force that those who benefit from the military service of others incur a moral obligation to those who serve the cause of defending our nation. Today, while a laudable segment of Americans remain committed to the concerns of veterans, the majority is not. Last year, less than 1 percent of charitable contributions in the United States went to veterans organizations. By comparison, Americans gave to animal welfare charities at five times that level. Most Americans are against reinstating the draft. Consequently, it is time to have a conversation focused on mechanisms to equitably share the burden of current and future wars with all members of our society.
I can offer a likely provocative start to that conversation. Congress should enact law requiring companies generating revenue from federal defense contracts to make annual philanthropic contributions to organizations that serve veterans and their families, equal to 1 percent of total operating profit generated from those contracts. Congress should enact law requiring colleges to make financial aid available to veterans, equal to 1 percent of the federal funding received annually by each institution. Those colleges must also admit students connected to the military, equal to or exceeding 1 percent of the total student population. Furthermore, Congress should enact law requiring all households to pay an annual military tax of $15. This would fund a national veterans trust designated to public and private programs serving the needs of military families.
After 17 years in Afghanistan, our elected leaders must demonstrate the courage to introduce policy requiring all Americans to shoulder the costs and consequences of war. In the absence of courage, war as a tool for diplomacy will remain far too easy a pursuit, our battles will drag on without end in sight, and veterans like Tim will remain anonymous.
Michael Haynie is a veteran of the United States Air Force, vice chancellor of Syracuse University, and executive director of the Institute for Veterans and Military Families. The views expressed in this column are his alone and not the views of RallyPoint.
*This article originally appeared on the Hill.
But then Tim said something that gave me goosebumps. “Worse than all that, now at home, I feel anonymous,” he told told us. Home among the very people who sent him to fight and kill our enemies, Tim feels invisible. For years, our elected leaders have debated strategies to end our wars after 9/11. However, only a brave few have acknowledged that until the costs and consequences of war are equitably shared by all Americans, our wars will drag on, military conflict will remain too painless a pursuit, and the experiment of an all volunteer military will fail us as a nation.
Three truths inform this proposition. First, our wars after 9/11 are not initially funded, at least in part, by taxpayers. Instead, the $5 trillion and growing cost has been largely paid on credit. Second, an exceedingly small number of Americans have directly shouldered the burden, and those who do serve are increasingly not representative of the citizenry. Finally, the assumption we have a ready pool of volunteers is becoming a myth. An estimated 70 percent of American youth are ineligible to volunteer, and the willingness of high school students to consider military service is at a record low. This could explain why the United States Army missed its recruiting goals this year for the first time since 2005.
Most agree that a military composed entirely of volunteers is superior to a conscripted force. However, many also acknowledge that this type of system is beginning to show cracks. Some of those cracks stem from fielding military members separate and apart from those who benefit from a safe and prosperous nation. The worst fears of those who architected the all volunteer military included a concern that because only “some” would shoulder the burdens of war, then war as an instrument of foreign policy would become too easy. They also feared that when those who fight come home, they would be cast as a government problem.
More than four decades and several wars later, I would describe these fears as prophetic. Since 1973, the United States has used military force on more than 220 occasions. Alternatively, in the 45 years prior when a draft was the law of the land, the United States leveraged military force as an instrument of foreign policy on just 24 occasions. Some of this contrast can rightfully be attributed to an complex global security situation, but it is also likely true that when you do not have to pay the bill, and when it is not your child being compelled to fight our battles, war is too easy.
Why do those who volunteer come home and cite lack of connection to civilian society? It is because after 17 years of war, we have discounted the foundational assumption sustaining the all volunteer force that those who benefit from the military service of others incur a moral obligation to those who serve the cause of defending our nation. Today, while a laudable segment of Americans remain committed to the concerns of veterans, the majority is not. Last year, less than 1 percent of charitable contributions in the United States went to veterans organizations. By comparison, Americans gave to animal welfare charities at five times that level. Most Americans are against reinstating the draft. Consequently, it is time to have a conversation focused on mechanisms to equitably share the burden of current and future wars with all members of our society.
I can offer a likely provocative start to that conversation. Congress should enact law requiring companies generating revenue from federal defense contracts to make annual philanthropic contributions to organizations that serve veterans and their families, equal to 1 percent of total operating profit generated from those contracts. Congress should enact law requiring colleges to make financial aid available to veterans, equal to 1 percent of the federal funding received annually by each institution. Those colleges must also admit students connected to the military, equal to or exceeding 1 percent of the total student population. Furthermore, Congress should enact law requiring all households to pay an annual military tax of $15. This would fund a national veterans trust designated to public and private programs serving the needs of military families.
After 17 years in Afghanistan, our elected leaders must demonstrate the courage to introduce policy requiring all Americans to shoulder the costs and consequences of war. In the absence of courage, war as a tool for diplomacy will remain far too easy a pursuit, our battles will drag on without end in sight, and veterans like Tim will remain anonymous.
Michael Haynie is a veteran of the United States Air Force, vice chancellor of Syracuse University, and executive director of the Institute for Veterans and Military Families. The views expressed in this column are his alone and not the views of RallyPoint.
*This article originally appeared on the Hill.
Edited 7 y ago
Posted 7 y ago
Responses: 94
Good article, my thanks. I like your suggestions for both defense contractors and for colleges & universities. I'm OK with taxing all American households as you suggest, exempting military households - as they are or already served!! One of those proposed revenue streams should fund VA medical shortfalls, and specifically - thousands of medical position vacancies, to include (notably) mental health professionals and women's health practitioners.
One small correction - roughly 70% of our youth are ineligible to enlist -- without a waiver. The number is still alarming but many 17-24 yr olds can and do get waivers for various reasons - mostly to do with childhood asthma and the use of certain steroid-based meds; diagnosis of children attention-deficit type disorders and the med associated with that; childhood obesity; and a few other types of medical issues that have exploded in the last 10-20 years; along with character, drug use, and educational deficiencies, of course. The other factor in the services struggling with recruiting goals has to do with the economy, which, when improving - effects that propensity to serve. More perceived opportunity in the civilian world = less interest in the volunteer military.
One small correction - roughly 70% of our youth are ineligible to enlist -- without a waiver. The number is still alarming but many 17-24 yr olds can and do get waivers for various reasons - mostly to do with childhood asthma and the use of certain steroid-based meds; diagnosis of children attention-deficit type disorders and the med associated with that; childhood obesity; and a few other types of medical issues that have exploded in the last 10-20 years; along with character, drug use, and educational deficiencies, of course. The other factor in the services struggling with recruiting goals has to do with the economy, which, when improving - effects that propensity to serve. More perceived opportunity in the civilian world = less interest in the volunteer military.
(0)
(0)
We learn from the experiences of others, which prepares us better for the situation and in finding the best solution for that problem, Maj Michael Haynie Sir.
(0)
(0)
I also agree that freedom is not shared by the American public. My daughter gave me a T shirt that says I'm a Vietnam Veteran and that Freedom is not Free, I paid for it. We all paid for it, veterans and active service alike. If we reinstate the draft system, it will save us money in wasted cost of the legal system having to process and incarcerate drug and violence to support the drug use. We need a backup to the military system for a ready reserve of fighting personnel. After these persons serve their period of the draft, then offer them a what ever we can to keep them in service. After their service period they may change their mind and opinion of the military. I was drafted and it worked for me.I had to put a few things on hold until I got out. Most of them were just dreams.
(0)
(0)
Suspended Profile
Well said!!!!!
There used to be a solution for this...our elected officials would never have gotten elected unless they were veterans. I would mandate service for all government positions. And if we were really going out on a limb then every member of Congress in order to vote to go to war should have to give a member of thier family to go fight. That is the historical approach. Sounds harsh. It also made people consider much more carefully before wanting to go to war. If this seems to drastic for anyone...then do what you can under the system we have...go vote.
(0)
(0)
I think the population should actually feel the cost of going to war. I would like to see two things:
1. Taxes to pay for the wars. Wars are expensive and we shouldn't pass all the debt on to our children.
2. Return of the draft. Make sure the fighters come from every neighborhood instead of getting so many from economically stressed areas.
People might think twice if the war cost them money and their own kids might be sent to fight.
1. Taxes to pay for the wars. Wars are expensive and we shouldn't pass all the debt on to our children.
2. Return of the draft. Make sure the fighters come from every neighborhood instead of getting so many from economically stressed areas.
People might think twice if the war cost them money and their own kids might be sent to fight.
(0)
(0)
Stop getting into unnecessary wars. if we stop supporting politicians who send our young people to war, we will have fewer disconnected veterans. Supporting soldiers has to mean more than shouting USA! USA! like a bunch of idiots.
(0)
(0)
Let's understand reality. First, our country's tenor will not likely support in the near or foreseeable future any type of conscription short of a war on the scale of a country attacking the United States similar to Japan's Second World War surprise in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. That being said, it should come as no surprise to anyone that so few will volunteer to serve. I personally served as an Army Recruiter in California's Bay area from 1983 to 1986 and I will tell anyone that the military was not and continues to be a choice that is unlikely to be taken by most youth. In essence we have the same sense of entitlement that pervasively runs through our country and culture that is "let those who can do nothing else serve in the military" and they want much given to them (those who refuse to serve) with no cost involved to their time or lives. I served 20 years on active duty from 1973 to 1993 and saw this firsthand and heard the sentiments echoed many times by these folks. As for forcing organizations to contribute, I would profer that it would not be far-removed from the very concept that our country was founded; Taxation without representation. One stellar aspect of many that marks our country is we have sought to avoid such tyrrany that this concept engenders.
(0)
(0)
Sir, without having access to this whole article, I first commented that We Do. Now having been able to read this entirly. I agree with you 100%.
(0)
(0)
I was deeply disappointed that the leadership of this nation did nothing from the on start of the wars to make the American people be a part of the Wars. During WWII their was rationing, did anyone have a hard time getting anything in this country? Hell we gave tax incentives to buy fuel inefficient automobiles. No we made a colossal mistake not forcing Americans to give something up for the War IMHO.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next

Syracuse
Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) - Afghanistan
Congress
IVMF
Military Family
