Comments on Boston Globe's Article

The Boston Globe recently published an article about the Peace Corps, questioning it’s validity and suggesting reforms and modifications to the organization as a whole. Before I start voicing my own opinions about the claims made, I want to reiterate the disclaimer on the right of my blog…. These, in NO WAY reflect the views of the United States Peace Corps nor the government nor Honduras, just ME! Cheque.

I am also voicing my opinions as a reflection of my experience thus far from just one of the 77 current Peace Corps posts worldwide. They are, in essence, biased.

The article, in case you're interested:
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2011/05/15/the_peace_corps_what_is_it_for/?page=full



#1.”The Peace Corps — an agency with a budget that reached $400 million in 2010 and which sends nearly 9,000 volunteers into risky environments every year — may no longer have a real purpose.” …………… The budget might seem like a lot, but the same amount of money goes towards the Peace Corps annually than to the army’s marching band. Ademas, in its 50 year history, less money has gone towards the Peace Corps than the US military receives in one fiscal year. Risky environments, that’s a valid point.

#2. “Today, more than one-third of volunteers quit before their two-year terms expire, according to internal agency documents obtained by the authors of the memo.”…… Please take this statistic with a grain of salt… “quit” can mean so many different things in regards to early termination of your service. One of your parents gets diagnosed with cancer, you are part of a bus assault or other nasty security incident, a close friend is sexually assaulted and it hits too close to home, no one in your community will work with you despite all your efforts….. so many things can happen…. I don’t like to use the word “quit” in Peace Corps….

#3. “Why should the American taxpayer in a time of horrendous budget cuts pay for these college grads to have a two-year vacation in a foreign land?” asked Paula Hirschoff, a two-time Peace Corps volunteer who along with her husband, Chuck Ludlam, authored the critical memo. “Why? It doesn’t make sense.”….. HOLD UP. I am sorry that this persons experience resembled a two year vacation but let me tell you straight from the field, nothing about this job is even remotely related to a two year vacation! I am sure that for some volunteers, living conditions are favorable and work minimal, but that is the vast minority. And about the budget cuts, refer to my comments in point #1. And, budget cuts are greatly affecting Peace Corps as well as it is affecting other organizations. We can certainly feel it in Honduras, as we just went from 6 projects down to 4.

#4. “But the problem, as a chorus of critics has been pointing out, is that the agency has never been structured to do development effectively.” …… this could go either way. It’s an ongoing struggle, but in my post at least, there is an extremely strong emphasis on sustainability- whether it’s working or not is another question.

#5. “They also wonder whether the Peace Corps should abandon what they call a “go it alone” policy, and start collaborating with other big aid organizations. Combining volunteers’ knowledge of individual communities with the resources and institutional memory of these larger organizations could be, they suggest, a recipe for building a more valuable Peace Corps.” …. YES! Not for every volunteer but at least for some… what powerful resources!

#6. “That lofty sense of virtue devoid of real mission strikes a lot of people as pretty fuzzy for an organization that is arguing for an even bigger budget and an increase in volunteer numbers.” ……. I wouldn’t go as far as to say “devoid of real mission.” There are clear goals for the organization as a whole, but it IS a diverse experience. That doesn’t have to make it “fuzzy.” And about the budget, again, refer to #1. In comparison to what our government spends on other things each year, even if the very least Peace Corps does is strengthen foreign relations (which is as important now as it was in 1961), I believe it’s money well spent.

#7. “What critics including Strauss want to see, before any expansion, is for the Peace Corps to tackle its structural problems.”……. I think reforming the structure of the organization as a whole is necessary, and agree that increasing the number of volunteers isn’t the best idea. Fewer volunteers and more individualized training is probably the smartest way to go.

#8. “They wonder if all this talk of reform and change overlooks what is most central about the agency, that it allows Americans to interact with the world. This simple notion, they say, is what has made for the resilience of the Peace Corps over the decades.”….. The Peace Corps has lasted 50 years, and has only grown stronger in recent years. Something’s working. I believe reforms are necessary, but I also love the diversity within the Peace Corps community. I’d hate to see it change drastically, but I think reducing the over all number of volunteers and focusing in on more specific projects might improve sustainability and work more towards international development. At the same time…. Would those changes take away from uniqueness of the organization as a whole? I don’t know.

Closing Remarks: Like any program as extensive as this one, modifying and reorganizing the structure every so often is necessary. With that being said, part of what makes this organization so unique is its diversity. I’d love to see structural changes within reason, but I’d hate for the initial idea of Peace Corps, helping/supporting through true understanding, to be lost. When you put the PC’s budget into perspective, it’s nothing, and it’s getting cut as we speak, so I just might scream if I hear/read one more complaint about the money being spent on this alleged fuzzy organization. Worry not, fiscally conservative tax payers, I assure you, you are not paying for anyone’s 2 year vacation filled with cockroaches, bucket baths, cat-calls, unpaved roads, minimal resources, and the like. You are helping to support motivated, be it idealistic, professionals (not all “recent college grads”) integrate into foreign cultures, making them better able to aid host country nationals in developing themselves. You are helping strengthen the ties between our country and other countries. You are giving people hope. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t, but that’s life, and it is true of all things. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try.