Impacts - Unemployment Good - Michigan 7 2023 CFLMP

Notes
Brought to you from the brilliant minds of Magnus Lee, Jenny Liu, and Alizah Mudaliar. This pairs well with an advantage CP that can increase unemployment to a level that will drive recruitment into the military in a satisfactory way.
Impact---Unemployment Good---CFMLP
!T---Military---Neg
1NC---Military Turn
High unemployment’s key to increase Army recruitment.
Brook '22 – (Tom Vanden; Pentagon correspondent for USA today, winner of 2015 Scripps Howard Award for Public Service Reporting; "Army recruiting crisis results in soldier shortage, record enlistment bonuses"; 7/10/22; https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2022/07/20/army-recruiting-crisis-shortage/10098673002/) NT-ML
WASHINGTON – The Army faces the worst recruiting environment since the all-volunteer force was created in 1973. The result: The service won't make its goal for recruits and faces a shrinking force in a dangerous world.
Army recruiting typically suffers when civilian jobs are plentiful. That trend is evident this year with the 3.6% unemployment rate, a figure just above a 50-year low. But new factors have dampened recruiting efforts, experts say, including Americans' new attitudes toward work-life balance formed during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The shortfall in soldiers comes as the Pentagon sends troops to reinforce NATO after Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February. In response, the Pentagon has bolstered its force in Europe to 100,000 troops, an increase of 20,000. The largest of the armed services, the Army generally provides the most boots on the ground during such emergencies.
The latest
The attractive civilian job market and a shrinking pool of qualified candidates has left the Army critically short of the young people it needs to fill its ranks and perform vital tasks.
Through April, the Army had recruited 68% of its goal, 8,282 soldiers fewer than its target. The Navy had a shortfall of 1,473 sailors, or 8% short of its goal. The Air Force, Marine Corps and Space Force all had met or exceeded their targets.
That’s key to readiness---extinction.
Bloomberg '22 – (Michael R; co-founder and CEO @ Bloomberg, Master of Business Administration; "Military Recruitment Woes Endanger National Security"; https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-08-08/us-military-has-a-recruitment-and-retention-problem-here-s-how-to-fix-it) NT-ML
From the Suwalki Gap to the Taiwan Strait, the US military faces no shortage of potential crises. But perhaps its biggest challenge lies close to home: A dwindling number of Americans are able and willing to serve in uniform. To maintain the military’s edge, the Pentagon needs to rethink how it recruits and retains troops — while also preparing to fight future wars with a leaner active-duty force.
On current trends, the outlook is troubling. To meet its overall goal of an active-duty force of 1.3 million, the military needs to bring in roughly 150,000 new recruits across its six service branches. With two months left in the fiscal year, the Pentagon is still 15% short of that goal, with the largest service, the Army, facing the biggest shortfall. Through the end of June, the Army had signed up 22,000 troops, 60% below its annual target. It could end the year with as few as 445,000 troops, nearly 40,000 smaller than the force size authorized by Congress.
A tight labor market is one reason for this state of affairs, but the bigger problem is the shrinking pool recruiters are drawing from. Because of rising rates of youth obesity and drug use, the share of Americans aged 17 to 24 who are eligible to serve without a waiver has fallen to 23%. Discounting those already enrolled in college, the number is only 12%. The military estimates that among those who are eligible, a mere 9% have a “propensity” to serve, the lowest since 2007, during the height of the Iraq War.
To fill the gap, the Army is offering $35,000 bonuses to recruits willing to start basic training within 45 days and allowing enlistees to choose where they’re stationed. The service has also expanded short-term enlistment options, giving some new soldiers the option of two years of active duty rather than the standard four.
While boosting incentives to attract high-quality recruits makes sense, other proposals — such as relaxing physical fitness standards or making it easier for recruits to obtain waivers for prior drug use or medical conditions — risk undermining readiness and discipline. Creating a boot camp for applicants who perform poorly on the Armed Forces Qualification Test may help low-aptitude candidates meet the minimum threshold for service, but it threatens to degrade the military’s overall competence.
Rather than lowering its standards, the Pentagon can take a more pragmatic approach. Greater priority can be given to retaining troops once they enlist, as the Marines have done. Financial bonuses, faster promotion opportunities, and incentives for obtaining new skills would encourage troops to consider longer military careers. The Pentagon can also broaden its pool of potential enlistees by stationing more recruiters in communities with low levels of military participation.
Despite such efforts, the US may well have to do more with less in the years ahead. Investments in unmanned weapons systems, artificial intelligence and higher-precision munitions have the potential to reduce manpower requirements. Greater collaboration with the private sector and smarter use of commercial technologies would allow the Pentagon to turn over more technical tasks, such as IT services, to civilian employees and contractors. The US should also press regional allies, particularly its NATO partners in Europe, to contribute more to collective defense.
Combating the threats to global order requires an American military that’s second to none. Keeping seasoned service members in uniform while harnessing the promise of new technologies can help the US overcome its recruiting challenges without sacrificing the military’s core strengths.
1NR---IL---Military
Recruitment is at an all-time low due to low unemployment rates.
Jackson '23 – (Jon; Associate Editor @ Newsweek; "Will U.S. military recruitment struggles cripple [decimate] response to wars?"; 3/20/23; https://www.newsweek.com/will-us-military-recruitment-struggles-cripple-response-wars-1789001) NT-ML
"Calling the Army recruiting shortfall a crisis is like saying that the Titanic had a 'small' problem in its crossing of the Atlantic," Ferrari and Kem wrote.
Rose Riley, spokesperson for the U.S. Air Force, told Newsweek that the branch had made its recruitment goals for the 2022 fiscal year by "a narrow margin" but weekly accessions continue to fall short in 2023.
"Record-low unemployment rates and steadily declining familiarity with the U.S. military today leaves us uncertain whether we can achieve our goals this year," Riley said in an emailed statement. "We are starting to see some positive results of our training programs, policy changes and our enhanced marketing efforts, but military recruiting will remain a long-term challenge."
Sergeant First Class Anthony Hewitt, an Army spokesperson, also told Newsweek of some of the reason why the Army has struggled to meet recruitment goals.
"The Army is facing unprecedented recruiting conditions due to a combination of factors including the current robust labor market, intense competition for talent with the private sector, and an ongoing decline in the segment of America's youth that are qualified and interested in serving in the military," Hewitt said in an emailed response.
Marine Corps Recruiting Command spokesperson Jim Edwards told Newsweek that while the Marines continue "to experience one of the most challenging recruiting environments since the establishment of the all-volunteer force," the Marine Corps nonetheless "remains on-track to accomplish the Fiscal Year 2023 accession mission."
It’s reverse causal---unemployment’s key to military recruitment. ’08 recession proves.
Peter '9 – (Tom A.; Foreign Correspondent @ the CSM; 11/12/09; "High unemployment means high military recruitment;" https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Military/2009/1112/p17s01-usmi.html) NT-ML
In the mellow singsong of the California surfer patois that adds an oddly cheerful flavor to his momentous decision, he explains: "I have a little girl, so I had to think about her and the possibility of never coming back to her. At the same time you've got to pay your bills and you've got to keep living." Counter is among thousands of Americans hit hard by the financial crisis who are finding financial refuge in the military, where in spite of the stark prospect of going to war, the work is steady and the pay and benefits are decent.
Economic hard times are a driving force in what the Department of Defense is calling the best recruitment year since 1973.
"We're pleased to report that for the first time since the advent of the all-volunteer force, all of the military components, active and reserve, met their number as well as their quality goals.… [T]hat's the first time that's been achieved for every component since the start of the all-volunteer force in 1973," said Bill Carr, head of personnel for the Department of Defense. In his October report on 2009 recruitment, he attributed part of the success to high unemployment rates in the US, in addition to increased spending on recruits and better military salaries.
ACROSS THE SERVICES, THE MILITARY MET all its goals and, after years of lowering standards during the peak of fighting in Iraq, this past year attracted one of the most educated groups to the military in nearly a decade.
All the services modestly exceeded their recruiting goals, with the Army having the most success, making 108 percent of its target. In sum, the US Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force brought in nearly 169,000 new recruits, while the National Guard and Reserve forces brought in about 138,000.
There is some question as to the significance of the military's record-level recruiting year. Some have pointed out that the services exceeded their goals only after lowering them, so in actuality fewer people joined the military this year than last.
However, the military has also managed to attract an undeniably more qualified core of recruits. The number of Army recruits with a high school degree was up 11 percentage points from last year. Across the services, 96 percent of recruits had a high school diploma, the strongest percentage since 1996. Additionally, the services saw the best showing on their math and verbal aptitude test since 2004 with 73 percent of recruits scoring above average.
For the US military, high unemployment rates have always meant a good thing for recruiting, says Lindsay Cohn, a political science professor who specializes in military personnel issues at the University of Northern Iowa. As far back as the Civil War, people have been turning to the military when the job market goes south.
"All kinds of people are losing their jobs, and all kinds of people of different levels of education and different levels of experience are going to look to the military to support their family," she says. "So you also get a quality spike when [an economic crisis] happens."
THAT QUALITY SPIKE IS NOTICEABLE, says Sgt. Greg Grayson, commander at the downtown Boston Army recruitment office where a jovial crew of soldiers in camouflage and several life-size cutouts of smiling soldiers greet visitors. "There has definitely been an increase in degree-credentialed applicants," he says. "They're done with school and the job market is not what they thought it was going to be."
Grayson says that since July his office has signed on an average of two candidates with bachelor's degrees each month – six in October. That compares with just two every three months a year ago. The office's total recruitment per month runs between nine and 12.
On an October afternoon, Vincent Cortigiano, a college dropout from Cleveland who came to Boston for the state's free healthcare and has cobbled together a living with temporary jobs, came in to sign up.
He says he couldn't afford to stay in college and chose the Army as a way to avoid going into debt.
Educated, slightly older recruits like Mr. Cortigiano, says James Allard, the Army's chief of public affairs for New England recruiting, have been "a definite positive impact on recruiting over the past year" both in terms of quality and quantity.
For those looking to the military to support their family, now more than ever recruits can make a sound living. Gone are the days of soldiers living on food stamps. Now they are among the top earners in the US for those with their education and experience.
The correlation is historically accurate and significant.
Asch '19 – (Beth J.; Senior Economist @ RAND Corporation, PhD in Economics; 2019; "Navigating Current and Emerging Army Recruiting Challenges;" RAND; https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR3107.html) NT-ML
After 2009, recruiting conditions improved. The economy stalled as a result of the Great Recession that began in fall 2008, thereby improving the attractiveness of Army service relative to recruits’ opportunities in the civilian workplace. Research shows an increase in high-quality enlistments when the unemployment rate rises (Asch et al., 2010; Knapp et al., 2018). The strong relationship between the strength of the economy and high-quality recruits is shown in Figure 4.7 In addition, the number of Army deployments fell markedly after 2010, and the Army accession mission began to decline as did the overall enlisted force size. Military pay, as measured by regular military compensation (RMC), was also relatively constant from 2010 to 2016 (Hosek et al., 2018).
<<Figure 3 Omitted>>
<<Figure 4 Omitted>>
The Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps responded to the improved recruiting conditions in 2009 by increasing recruit quality and specifically the percentage of recruits who are scored as AFQT Categories I–IIIA (Figure 5), sustaining percentages that exceeded 70 percent Categories I–IIIA through 2016. U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) guidelines are that 60 percent of recruits are AFQT Categories I–IIIA and 90 percent are Tier 1. The other services well exceeded the DoD guideline after 2009.
In contrast, the Army responded to the improved recruiting conditions by cutting resources and chose to reduce the percentage of recruits in AFQT Categories I–IIIA down to the 60 percent DoD guideline. Knapp et al. (2018) show that the percentage of Army recruits receiving bonuses, average bonus amounts, and Army advertising expenditures dropped dramatically in 2009. Furthermore, Army-enlisted recruits with prior military service (Figure 2, right) and those receiving medical or conduct waivers dropped considerably in 2009 compared with 2008. The Army also increased Tier 1 recruits dramatically in 2009 (Figure 2, left) and kept the percentage Tier 1 at or above 90 percent thereafter. Even with fewer recruiting resources, the Army met its overall accession mission between 2009 and 2017 and even substantially exceeded it in 2010 and 2012.
The Army’s differing strategy when recruiting conditions improved suggested that the Army focused on reducing recruiting costs while achieving its overall recruiting mission and meeting DoD benchmarks of 90 percent Tier 1 and 60 percent AFQT Categories I–IIIA recruits. The other services focused on achieving their overall mission while increasing recruit quality above the benchmarks. The different strategies raise the question of what level of recruit quality is appropriate: Are the DoD benchmarks still relevant, should recruit quality increase, or should recruiting costs decrease when recruiting conditions improve? Put differently, how should the services, and the Army specifically, reap the benefits of a less-challenging recruiting market? The Army’s approach would be more appropriate than the other services if the DoD benchmarks are still relevant. On the other hand, if higher recruit quality is required, increasing the higher recruit quality produced by the other services would be more appropriate, although as discussed in more detail in the following section, research shows that increasing resources other than military pay might be a more cost-effective means of increasing recruit quality.
Recruiting has become more challenging in recent years, however. The Army’s total recruiting mission has increased from 57,000 in 2014 to 76,500 in 2018. Furthermore, the economy has dramatically improved. The adult unemployment rate reached a high of 9.6 percent in 2010, but, by 2014, had fallen to 7.4 percent, as shown in Figure 4. In June 2019, adult unemployment was 3.7 percent. As mentioned earlier, research shows that Army high-quality recruits fall, given no other changes, when the economy improves. Tools developed at the RAND Corporation (discussed in the following section), such as the Recruiting Resource Model (RRM), can help the Army assess the relative efficiency of different resource mixes when conditions such as the strength of the economy are changing.
Low recruitment is due to tight labor markets---only unemployment solves.
Fink '23 – (Alex Fink – Major General, chief US Army Enterprise Marketing Team; Sean McHenry – host & senior editor @ Marketplace; Kai Ryssda – associate producer @ MarketPlace; "U.S. Army brings back "Be All You Can Be" amid lagging recruitment"; 4/12/23; https://www.marketplace.org/2023/04/12/u-s-army-brings-back-be-all-you-can-be-amid-lagging-recruitment/) NT-ML
The U.S. Army has a recruitment problem. In 2022, the service missed recruitment goals by 25% — the only armed service to do so. Now, the Army is bringing back a marketing campaign from the ’80s and ’90s in the hope that the rebranding can help bridge the gap.
The Army launched its “Be All You Can Be” campaign in March with a price tag of $117 million. Shortly afterward came the arrest of actor Jonathan Majors, who was featured in two marquee ads. The ads were pulled, and two new ones took their place.
Besides the television spots, the Army is hoping to take advantage of new tech infrastructure known as MarTech, which allows the service to track which marketing efforts actually lead to enlistments. Maj. Gen. Alex Fink, the Army’s chief of enterprise marketing, spoke with “Marketplace” host Kai Ryssdal about the technology.
Alex Fink: The nirvana within marketing is to be able to actually see a sale and then trace that sale back to a marketing activity. In fact, in 2019, we probably contracted around 120,000 soldiers across all three components, the Army, Army Reserve and the Army National Guard. We can only make an attribution of about 500 of those, so insignificant.
Kai Ryssdal: Wow.
Fink: We’ve made some significant investments over the years. And you know, we’re up around 40% of all enlisted contracts today. We can see what marketing activities that youth who actually signed a contract, what brought them in, what drew them in. And so that has obviously given us great insights into the type of content and the type of media that we use.
Ryssdal: All right. So look, you’ve got all this data. You can do the MarTech and all of that stuff. And yet still, the secretary of the Army said not too long ago, fiscal year ’22, you only met 75% of your recruiting goals. So you’ve got some challenges.
Fink: Right. And it’s a multifaceted challenge for sure. There’s things in the environment that the Army has little control of, there’s things that we have some control of and there’s some things we have a lot of control of. And the things that we have a lot of control of, like our brand and how we go to market, are in that category. And so, this is clearly one of many different things that the Army is trying to do to address the recruiting challenges.
Ryssdal: So here’s the thing you don’t really have control of: the American labor market. When you and I spoke in 2019, the labor market was tight. Here we are thr

Preview shortened. Download the file for the full document.