Fox News Opinion Calls for Mandatory Year of National Service for Americans Aged 18 to 28

America faces war abroad and division at home. An opinion piece calls for requiring every young American between 18 and 28 to give at least one year of service to the nation.

The United States asks little of its citizens for the blessings of liberty. Fewer than one percent of Americans serve on active duty in the armed forces. Sacrifice has faded from national consciousness. Leaders make decisions about war and peace with little connection to those who fight. The gap between the nation and its defenders widens. In this system, service to country becomes someone else's duty.

A required year of national service, either military or civilian, would close that gap.

Some would serve in the armed forces. Others would teach children struggling to read, rebuild communities after disasters, conserve forests and waterways, or care for the elderly. The work would vary, but the purpose would be shared.

National service would build character, a quality essential to public life. Character forms through responsibility: rising early for tasks larger than oneself, working with people who think differently, and gaining discipline, resilience, and humility. These habits come from experience.

The republic's founders knew a self-governing nation needs citizens capable of self-government. They understood freedom rests on duties as well as rights.

Many Americans see a character deficit in public life today. Leadership often rewards division over duty. Power and self-promotion overshadow public service. A year of service could shape a generation with character, duty, and commitment to national ideals.

Service would unite Americans when politics divides them. Young people from different backgrounds and beliefs would share work. A student from Boston might rebuild homes with a peer from rural Alabama. A young woman from Los Angeles might tutor children with a young man from Iowa. Stereotypes would turn to friendships, and suspicions to understanding. Shared effort counters division.

The idea draws from American history. Nearly every president since Washington has stressed service for the nation's health. In crises, Americans have served on a vast scale. During World War II, millions joined the military while others worked in factories, fields, and civil defense.

In peacetime, service shaped the country too. During the Great Depression, the Civilian Conservation Corps employed millions of young Americans to restore forests, build parks, and protect natural areas. The program offered jobs and dignity while creating a lasting legacy.

America needs that shared commitment now.

Some claim mandatory civilian service violates the Constitution. Legal guidance suggests options for service could avoid issues with the 13th Amendment ban on involuntary servitude, the 5th Amendment protection against liberty deprivation, and 1st Amendment free speech challenges.

Others call it too costly. The $40 billion for living stipends and education awards equals 0.5 percent of the annual federal budget. Nonprofits could contribute, gaining human capital for their missions. Benefits like the GI Bill would help participants attend college and find work.

Some argue liberty is America's core value and service should not be compelled. The piece counters that Americans with service experience would better protect liberty, the Constitution, and rule of law. One year in a lifetime is not too much.

America has thrived on individual aspiration and common purpose. The nation built railroads across the continent, lifted generations from poverty, and reached the moon through collective effort.

Current challenges include renewing trust in institutions, healing divisions, providing opportunity, revitalizing democracy, and sustaining alliances for peace.

A year of national service would not solve every problem. It would remind Americans, especially the next generation, that the country belongs to them and its future depends on their service.