Counter Recruitment in the Lehigh Valley 

Stephanie Garman, LEPOCO Youth and Militarism coordinator 2006-2007

      Counter recruitment is the term used to define all those efforts to balance the effects of military recruitment in our high schools and colleges. It has been adopted by the anti-war movement as part of the effort to end the war of the moment, right now, the war in Iraq. Here in the Lehigh Valley, there are about 30 high schools, all of which have military recruitment programs that allow military recruiters access to the students. Further, the No Child Left Behind Act contains a provision that mandates that all public schools must provide student information for all secondary students to military recruiters, unless the student files a form known as an “opt-out” form with the school that notifies the school that the student does not want his or her information released. 

       LEPOCO’s Youth and Militarism program has, in the last three years, contacted all 27 of the high schools within 25 miles of Bethlehem, asked for permission to provide students with recruiting and job information that would counter the arguments of millitary recruiters. Resistance has been stiff from the schools. The Coordinator of the Youth and Militarism program in 2004 and 2005, Peter Crownfield, told me the normal response from school administrators: “Most of the time they would simply not return letters or calls.” 

      After being refused or stonewalled by administrators, volunteers with the Y & M program leaflet the students at the schools with information about recruitment and where to get help with alternatives to the military, and have often been harassed by teachers and administrators. I have been present when teachers have accused us of being “unpatriotic”, others have told me of confrontations with officials who called them “communists”. 

      Here is an account of a counter recruiter working with Phillipsburg High School - “I will tell you that we had a serious situation at Phillipsburg last year, as a teacher got hostile, yelling at us, ‘If it wasn’t for the military, you wouldn’t even be here’. My response to that was that if we didn’t have a military, I wouldn’t need to be here. They have a military show, helicopters take off, flag raisings, big school events around military traditions. They are a heavily militarized school.” 

      At times, the American Civil Liberties Union has helped gain access to the school, as happened at Phillipsburg in 2005. A public high school has an obligation to allow access to different views – it is called the First Amendment in action, but the school often has to be threatened with an attorney before they will allow free speech. 

      The pressures on military recruiters are tremendous. Today, there are 8000 full time recruiters for the Army alone, with the job of meeting a goal of 80,000 enlistees a year. The total annual enlistment goal for all branches of the military and reserves is 320,900. Each recruit costs the taxpayer $16,000 in costs, just for recruitment. 

      Military recruitment is a no holds barred process. Recruiters cruise malls, skateboard parks, anywhere they can gain access to young people who might be looking for a direction, any direction. They will say whatever they have to, to get youth in uniform, to meet their quota. They don’t inform recruits of the high rates of sexual abuse suffered by female soldiers, or the reality that 65% of veterans never use their scholarship benefits. 

       It is indicative of the desperate state of our culture that schools are so reluctant to have a counterpoint to the military within an academic setting. Only four schools, Freedom, Liberty, Phillipsburg and Easton have allowed the Youth and Militarism group to present materials in the schools. Only Liberty has made the opt-out form a required form, which has resulted in a 400% increase in students opting out at Liberty. 

      The relationship of recruiting to the war is very real. Stephanie Garman, the coordinator of the Y & M program in the 2006-2007 school year, had this to say about the necessity of taking the long view, the realistic view: 

       “Counter recruitment is by leaps and bounds the most important anti-war effort that is out there. Most of us are so far removed from the corruption that actually causes the war that sometimes I think activists have the wrong approach, to drum up support for ending the war. So what, we go from 80% to 90% against the war, clearly the constituents do not want the war, this unjust war. The issue is that our congresspeople do not listen to the people, our democracy doesn’t work. From the contituency to the representative there is a vast, gaping space. We could have 100% of the people screaming for what we demand, and they are too far away to hear us. I believe that that has 100% to do with the money that we pay them, which is peanuts compared to what they are paid by lobbyists. So whom do they work for? They don’t work for the constituents, they work for the people who pay them, who have full agendas of their own. They are not going to listen to us.” 

      “So, drumming up support … I have spent much time at the UFPJ conference, in the community. I am always hearing about mobilizations, and I believe in the power of protest, about getting younger people involved, or for example, there is a lot of talk in UFPJ about getting a stronger Arabic presence within the anti-war movement. For what? I ask myself. Why get more young people involved or more Arabic people involved? It’s not about that. What I am most concerned about is that we could have everyone involved and unless there’s a concerted effort that changes the way the system works, it going to continue to be like this. We don’t have any power anymore. With that said, the most important thing we, as individuals can do, is show up at high schools, at events where there are young people. I guarantee the military will be there. From one potential recruit to the next, we need to talk, person to person, with these people and give them nothing more, not our opinions or theories, but nothing more than all the information so they can make an educated decision about their life. To me, that’s the most important thing the anti-war movement can do right now, because all of the other efforts are in some ways futile.”

       Another aspect of militarism in our schools is the Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (JROTC) program. Stephanie examined one of the oldest JROTC curriculums in the area, at William Allen High School. She had this to say about the program: “Allentown has an active JROTC since 1986, and therefore, the administration has denied us access for counter-recruitment, because the school does not allow recruiters outside of JROTC. But they have an active JROTC, so they don’t need to do that. I have pitched the idea that the school should pay an equal amount of funds as are expended for JROTC – it is an economic strain, a strain on space and resources – to have a conflict resolution group, an international peace studies group. People with the opposing view should be provided with the exact amount of resources and funding to provide an alternate view. That would be equal access, but they don’t see it that way.” 

      “I have also done a research study on JROTC in the Allentown schools. The most interesting piece that came out of it was that looking at secondary education outcomes, dropout rates, GPA, through information at the State Board of Education, is that although JROTC shows up before a school board at a school that is economically disadvantaged and notes the dropout rates, discipline problems, and say that they will help. What is interesting as I did this study is that all the promises that they make are not met. Yet, they are held without accountability standards for their program. They are given more freedom and liberties. Instructors do not have to have certification or education background. They teach history classes, in lieu of high school history.” 

       “Since 2001, there are no records kept as to recruitment. William Allen is one of the most heavily recruited school on the east coast, and there are no records of how many recruits enlist from William Allen.” Stephanie’s study is called, “Quantitative Study: Is JROTC Worth its Weight in Tax Dollars?” As she states above, she used the available data from the State Board of Education to examine how William Allen is faring under its JROTC regime. She shows that during the period of the program dropout rates increased, reading levels declined, enlistment rates rose, college attendance fluctuated throughout the period studied. 

       She concludes, “None of the areas study showed improvement over the last twenty years. All but students attending a degree granting institution showed declines in desired results. Enlistment did increase and then was no longer reported at least by the same sources. Eleventh grade reading rates are dramatically lower then they were in 1986. Dropout rates have recently begun to sky rocket.” 

       “I conclude that JROTC is not a wise use of the already few funds available to WAHS, an economically disadvantaged school. I plan to share my findings with the superintendent and the school board. I am also going to share this data with the school board of a neighboring district that is in application process for a JROTC program currently.” 

       Stephanie will be leaving the coordinator position this Fall, due to other work responsibilities, but notes the importance of getting those opt-out forms into the hands of students and parents, with enough information for them to make a decision: “What is most important right now for counter recruitment is the opt out forms.” 

       The military is being given unprecedented access to our students. This week, the Reading Eagle reported that the Wilson School District (of Reading) has allowed the military to purchase three years of advertising an “Army Strong” campaign in the boys’ weight room and locker room for $60,000. The school will net $42,000, after the Market Street Sports Group, Lancaster, takes its 30 percent. Will the students hear the truth about the military, or about all their options for a life after high school? 

      Counter recruitment, finally, is about critical thinking, about transparency, about free speech and maintaining all points of view in a free society. As Peter Crownfield, prior coordinator, stated about counter recruitment, “To me, it is an issue of student rights, of being presented with different points of view, of students being able to form their own opinions, and then act freely.” 

      Is this too much to ask of our local high schools?                                 - Joe DeRaymond