34.        The potential benefits of mandatory public service must be weighed against
administrative problems and concerns about individual liberty. On balance, the costs to
a nation and to the participants would probably exceed the benefits.
      Admittedly, a colorable argument can be made for mandatory public service. It
would help alleviate "free-rider" problems, where those who do not contribute benefit
from the efforts of those who do. It would mitigate pressing social problems—with
education, public health and safety, and the environment. It might instill in participants a
sense of civic duty, community, and individual responsibility. Finally, it has worked on a
smaller scale, particularly in urban areas, where renewal projects succeed in making
communities safer, healthier, and more prosperous.
      Far more compelling, however, are the arguments against mandatory public
service. First, who would make assignments and decide what projects are worthwhile,
and how would compliance be assured? Resolving enforcement issues would require
government control, in turn requiring increased taxes and/or cuts in other social
programs, thereby nullifying the benefits of mandatory public service. Second, a
mandatory system would open the floodgates to incompetence and inexperience. Finally,
the whole notion seems tantamount to Communism insofar as each citizen must
contribute, according to his or her ability, to a strong state. Modern history informs us
that such systems do not work. One could argue that mandatory public service is simply
a tax in the form of labor rather than dollars. However, compulsory labor smacks of
involuntary servitude, whereas financial taxes do not.
      In conclusion, logistical and philosophical barriers to mandating public service
outweigh its potential benefits for the nation as well as for participants.