Well here we are on the last day of the fiscal year. Back when I had a short stint as a recruiter, it was always amusing to watch (ahem) another service which shall remain unidentified, literally bring in warm bodies to the AFEES station (AFEES, the Armed Forces Entrance and Examining Stations are now called MEPS, Military Entrance Processing Stations, I believe) to get a physical, an ASVAB and an interview, so they could be counted on the 30th of September as "recruits". If they didn't pop positive on the urinalysis for drugs or diabetes, they would find themselves shipped off to basic training within 18 to 24 hours. At that point if they were booted out, and given a free bus ride home, it didn't matter to the recruiter or that services recruiting command, they were counted as "accessions" and the "goal" was met. Needless to say, on the 28th, 29th, and 30th of September it got pretty busy around the AFEES, I always tried to get my officer candidates through their physicals before mid-September, I knew what was coming. It was not a pretty picture. It was all about making numbers. Well, guess what?

The Army is closing the books on one of the leanest recruiting years since it became an all-volunteer service three decades ago, missing its enlistment target by the largest margin since 1979 and raising questions about its plans for growth.
...
Officials insist the slump is not a crisis.

Because crisis is just not the word to use when disaster is a more accurate description.

The Army has not published official figures yet, but it apparently finished the 12-month counting period that ends Friday with about 73,000 recruits. Its goal was 80,000. A gap of 7,000 enlistees would be the largest - in absolute number as well as in percentage terms - since 1979, according to Army records.

The Army National Guard and the Army Reserve, which are smaller than the regular Army, had even worse results.
...
The factors working against the Army, Hilferty said, are a strong national economy that offers young people other choices, and "continued negative news from the Middle East."

Gee, imagine that "continued negative news from the Middle East", who'd have thought that would deter parents from recommending that their children get on a big silver bird and spend a year in the sand. The Army is spending a lot of money to try and influence parents to see the Army as a viable option for their kids. Is it working? The jury is still out, but early indications are that it's not working too well.

I'm going to go to a "career night" at my daughters high school, and introduce myself to the local recruiters who are there, and see if they'll let me hang out with them. There are a lot of ribbon-bedecked SUV's in that parking lot every day, so many that you'd think I'll see them lined up three deep to sign up. We'll see. I'm guessing I'll be buying those recruiters a beer or two afterwards and have them tell me that General Quarters in summer without air conditioning is more fun than sitting in high school career days and watching young men and women who once might have considered an enlistment now avoid them like they have monkey pox.

Which brings up that question, with the lowered real accessions i.e. those who actually make it through Basic Training (and I notice that they Army is not releasing that number, thank you very much), and the growing demands for soldiers in Iraq, as well as other global committments, is anyone else wondering how long until those dreaded words "Mandatory National Service" rear their ugly head? Because unlike the budget, where the administration chooses to keep handing out IOU's in exchange for services rendered, they can't just fabricate warm bodies to fill the ranks of the military.

So, what's it going to be? Stay tuned...