AmeriCorps provides the critical infrastructure that enables young men and women to serve their communities.  Funding from AmeriCorps pays to set up the programs that provide essential services to local communities and it helps volunteers cover the cost of dedicating a year of their lives to providing these services.

Without emergency funding for AmeriCorps, my home state of Illinois will suffer.  If we in Congress do not act to save AmeriCorps now, 11,625 fewer children in Illinois will receive tutoring and mentoring;  14,850 fewer residents will be provided services such as support for the homeless, health and education outreach, and counseling; and there will be 12,469 fewer volunteers, representing  80,402 fewer hours of service to the community.

If we do not act, City Year Chicago, one of the innovative programs that President Clinton based the AmeriCorps model on, will receive no funding this year and, as a result, Chicago public schools will lose 85 volunteers.  Without additional AmeriCorps funding, the American Red Cross of Greater Chicago will receive only about half of last year’s grant.

President Bush and my Republican colleagues in the House are playing politics with the future of a successful national program that has enriched so many lives in so many communities.  They are putting AmeriCorps on the chopping block even though it provides meaningful work for young people at a time when youth unemployment is a national crisis.  

AmeriCorps is a solid government investment.  The GAO estimates that for every dollar that we the taxpayers spend on AmeriCorps, we get up to $2.60 in return.  If Congress does not fully fund AmeriCorps this year, Illinois' AmeriCorps will see a dramatic decrease from $8 million to $2 million, which translates to a loss of up to $15.6 million in benefits.

Given these facts, how could I not be an AmeriCorps supporter?  What I do not understand is why my Republican colleagues are not AmeriCorps supporters.

Is it because they believe providing additional funding would be financially irresponsible or that the government should not fund volunteerism?  What is the basis of opposing the future of AmeriCorps? 

President Bush has time and time again eloquently lauded the benefits of public service in major speeches.  In his State of the Union Address President Bush asked “Congress and the American people to focus the spirit of service and the resources of government on the needs of some of our most vulnerable citizens.”  And he promised that, “Government will support the training and recruiting of mentors; yet it is the men and women of America who will fill the need.”  

But President Bush will not follow through on this promise and his misplaced budgetary priorities are placing the future of AmeriCorps and other critical programs at risk.

It is not enough for the President or any Member of Congress to simply state that they support volunteerism.  Actions speak louder than words.  I call on my Republican colleagues to support additional funding for AmeriCorps now—“later” will be too late.