Gibson failed to challenge Army spokesman on purported recruiting successes
SUMMARY: On Fox News' The Big Story, Army spokesman Lt. Col. Bryan Hilferty touted recent reports that the Army is meeting its recruiting goals. Host John Gibson suggested that the new figures counter the perception that "America doesn't want to have anything to do with the war" in Iraq, ignoring a variety of other factors that might be influencing the Army's recruiting performance.
On the July 10 edition of Fox News' The Big Story, host John Gibson interviewed Army spokesman Lt. Col. Bryan Hilferty, who touted recent reports that the Army is meeting its current monthly recruiting goals and is on track to meet its yearly recruitment target. Gibson suggested that the new figures counter the perception that "America doesn't want to have anything to do with the war" in Iraq. But Gibson ignored other reasons the Army might be meeting its recruiting goals: After the Army failed to meet its goal of 80,000 new enlistees for fiscal year 2005, it considerably lowered its recruiting standards, raised funding for recruiters, and increased enlistment incentives significantly more than Hilferty admitted.
According to a New York Times brief, last fiscal year (ending in September 2005), "the Army closed out one of its most difficult recruiting periods in decades, falling more than 6,600 recruits short. It was the first shortfall since 1999, and the largest in 26 years." Since then, the Army has introduced numerous policies in an attempt to bolster its recruiting numbers. In a July 11 article reporting that the Army is currently meeting its recruitment goals, USA Today quoted David Segal, military sociologist at the University of Maryland, who said that the Army has increased its numbers by also accepting more recruits who have lower scores on qualification tests. USA Today reported that in 2005, the Army "began accepting up to 4% of those who score in the bottom third on the Armed Forces Qualification Test," while "[p]reviously, it had a limit of 2% from that category." Also, according to a November 2005 Government Accountability Office report, the Defense Department projected that its annual recruiting budget will rise by nearly $90 million from fiscal 2005 to fiscal 2006, or from $639.5 million to $726.2 million. The Army has also increased its recruiting staff. As a Congressional Budget Office report noted, "[t]he Army increased its recruiting force from 5,100 at the beginning of 2005 to 6,500 by year's end."
While Gibson did ask if the Army is "offering special incentives" and mentioned that the Army had raised its age limit for enlistment (from 35 to 42), Hilferty downplayed the new policies, saying that the Army offers "some bonuses, enlistment bonuses, but really, you know, an American doesn't join the Army because he'll get $2,000. He joins the Army for what he wants to do for his country. I think the 2, 3, 4.000 dollars that people get -- that does help them say that we care about them." Hilferty also minimized the significance of the age-limit increase by claiming that the rule was changed to allow people such as "marathoners" and businesspeople with master's degrees to join the Army.
Gibson did not challenge Hilferty's statement downplaying signing bonuses for recruits. But USA Today noted that "[s]ome new soldiers are eligible for as much as $40,000 in enlistment bonuses." Nor did Gibson mention, as the Times reported last year, that the Army "offered a new 15-month enlistment, instead of the previous minimum two-year term" to help meet recruiting goals.
On July 7, the Times also reported that, according to a Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) report, the U.S. military has for the first time since 1996 allowed "large numbers of neo-Nazis and skinhead extremists" into the armed forces as a result of recruiting shortages stemming from the Iraq war. The Times noted that the SPLC report "estimated that the numbers could run into the thousands, citing interviews with Defense Department investigators and reports and postings on racist Web sites and magazines." According to the report, a Defense Department investigator said: "We've got Aryan Nations graffiti in Baghdad," adding, "[T]hat's a problem."
From the July 10 edition of Fox News' The Big Story with John Gibson:
GIBSON: A recruiting record for our armed forces. The Pentagon says all four branches of the military exceeded active-duty recruiting goals for the 13th straight month. Joining us now, Army spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Bryan Hilferty. So Colonel, you know, there's a lot of talk about America doesn't -- isn't supporting the war. America doesn't want to have anything to do with the war. In the light of that, how can you explain exceeding recruiting goals?
HILFERTY: I think, John, that -- I mean, it says a lot about the American youth. So far, this fiscal year, 56,000 -- sorry, 51,612 Americans have joined the Army. That's more people than fit into Yankee Stadium. And like you said, we've met our goals for 13 months in a row. That says a lot about Americans.
GIBSON: What -- what -- are you offering special incentives? Money, vacations to the Caribbean, or something?
HILFERTY: We offer vacations to the Middle East, but primarily, we offer people the chance to serve their country. We offer some bonuses, enlistment bonuses, but really, you know, an American doesn't join the Army because he'll get $2,000. He joins the Army for what he wants to do for his country. I think the 2, 3, 4,000 dollars that people get -- that does help them say that we care about them.
GIBSON: Is this -- is this part of this phenomenon that we've seen that re-enlistment rates run at record-high levels?
HILFERTY: That's another good point, John. So far, for the past several years, two out of three soldiers eligible to re-enlist do re-enlist. Two out of three soldiers who are in the Army, who were deployed, who know what we're doing in a protracted war continue to re-enlist. I mean, just -- I think people, once they join the team, they want to stay on the team.
GIBSON: Colonel, the other issue, I think you have raised the age at which you will take people. What's it up to now?
HILFERTY: The age has been raised recently from 35 to 42. But I'll tell you what that was really about. That's not going to really help us meet our recruiting mission. We have several hundred we expect who will join in that age. That's giving people who want to serve the opportunity to serve. I had a couple people who've been emailing me over the past year because they see my name in print. They said, "I want to join the Army, but I'm 40 years old, I have a master's degree, I run my own business." This one guy was a marathoner, but our rules said he couldn't join, our bureaucratic rules. So we changed them to let those people, who meet all the other standards, give them the opportunity to do something meaningful in their lives.
GIBSON: Colonel, the -- I take it that those people who are joining now either know they are going to be sent to Iraq, or there's a good chance of it, or want to be sent to Iraq. What are the chances that anybody recruited right now is going to find himself somewhere in Iraq?
HILFERTY: You know, I'd hate to say that you're not going to go to Iraq or Afghanistan. I have two tours in Afghanistan and one tour in Iraq during Desert Storm. But presently, only about 50 percent of the Army has deployed. So, over half of the Army has joined since 9-11. So, over half of the Army knew exactly what they were getting into, but only 50 percent, again, have actually deployed.
GIBSON: So, you must be pretty proud of this rate.
HILFERTY: We're pretty happy. I mean, we're optimistic. July looks really good. July is a 10,000-person month. But we think we are going to make July, and we're pretty optimistic for the year. And I've got to give the credit to the recruiters, who are out there doing that hard work every day.
GIBSON: All right, Lieutenant Colonel Bryan Hilferty, Army spokesman. Colonel, thanks very much.
HILFERTY: Thanks, John.
















These rightwingers know that it's just a matter of PRICE to have a hooker say you're a "virile and handsome man, and a great lover."
How much will it cost? $2000? $40,000? At some point, anybody will "sign up", and then you have another statistic to add to your "I'm a great guy" list.
And the BEAUTY is ... Bush isn't using his OWN MONEY to buy "popularity" in the form of meeting recruitment goals. Nope. He's charging US, WE THE PEOPLE, and you know what? Money is no object, when the goal is allowing the likes of Gibson here to say that your POLICIES are A-OK, and the proof is in the numbers signing up!
Incidious.
That's called "spin".
You and your MSM buddies are very good at it. ESPECIALLY if it does the White House a favor.
but the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps have all made their active-duty recruiting numbers for 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004. For 2005, all services met their active-duty recruiting goals, with the exception of the Army, but the Army is 4 percent above its goal so far this year in 2006. Link: Active Duty Recruiting Exceeds Goals.
MMFA has cherrypicked one negative in reporting active-duty recruiting numbers.
...I don't think that's the point of this item. MMFA doesn't make the claim that the U.S. military isn't hitting its recruitment targets, but that they, the Army in particular, are lowering their standards to do so. Gibson, if he is to be a journalist, should have at least made some of these points clear if he is going to host a segment congratulating the Army for its recruitment numbers while suggesting that perhaps Americans don't oppose the war after all because of it...
Raising the eligible age and lowering the selective criteria for who can get in to go to Iraq is how the military have made their recruitment goals.
Not to mention, I don't believe anyone here has a bubble to burst? Whatever that means. Gibson has proven again and again that he is a partisan hack who twists the facts to serve his relentless cheerleading for Bush, Inc. Shoes, if you don't see that... well, hell, why don't you sign up and win a vacation to Iraq? Just a thought.
The POINT here is Gibson claiming this is a popular and enthusiastically supported war, based on recruiting numbers "making quota".
This MIGHT be true, if all things remained constant in the recruiting game. THEY HAVE NOT. Standards have lowered, while incentives have increased drastically. The money poured INTO recruiting has increased enormously as well. "SUCCESS" in meeting recruiting does NOT show SUPPORT -- quite the opposite. To entice the SAME NUMBER of recruits is costing this nation many hundreds of millions of dollars MORE, and the recruits accepted are NOT at the same high standard that used to be required.
The message is the OPPOSITE of what Gibson blithely says, that Bush's war is doing just fine, and is popular with the troops. On the contrary, if it were a BUSINESS, it would be bankrupt. A business cannot continue paying astronomical bonuses, paying tremendous fees for "hiring agents", and accepting less qualified workers, and still remain viable. And it certainly can't tout "our people LOVE us" when it's costing a fortune to keep anybody on board.
The 104% YTD Army recruiting performance sounds positive? At that rate, they should be able to meet their annual goal, right? Wrong. Once again (I covered this several weeks go), here's the rest of the story.
For Fiscal Year 2005 (Oct '04-Sept '05), the Army recruiting goal was 80,000. Through May '05, the Army had recruited 40,964. By the end of FY 2005, the Army had recruited 73,373, over 8% short of the annual goal. (See [link to www.defenselink.mil] and search for recruitment and retention news releases for past recruiting numbers.)
The FY 2006 recruiting goal is once again 80,000. Although, the 2006 recruiting is ahead of the YTD 2006 goal, it's only 4.6% ahead of the 2005 YTD performance. At the present rate, one would expect the Army to finish with around 76,767 recruits, or about 4% short of it's FY 2006 goal. I.e., Army FY 2006 YTD recruiting goals appear to have been heavily loaded toward the end of the year, allowing earlier YTD goals to be met, but leaving the annual goal still in doubt.
Of course, another problem with the Army recruiting is the reduction in standards. Although Hilferty downplays it, the increase in the maximum recruiting age has accounted for over 1,000 recruits. (See [link to www4.army.mil] ) Also note that the maximum age was raised from 35 to 40 in March 2005; it was raised again last month to 42.
You are correct that the most of the services have continued to meet their recruiting goals. I haven't taken time to research their goals and past performance as I did with the Army to see if any similar manipulation of numbers have occured. However, I would not be surprised if the recruiting difficulties are unique to the Army, given the perception that they are bearing the brunt of the Iraq conflict.
Cheney to Tony Snow: Can you call your friends over at Fox and have them air a recruiting commercial on Fox's Big Story?
" in 2005, the Army "began accepting up to 4% of those who score in the bottom third on the Armed Forces Qualification Test""
To clarify, that bottom third means that up to 4% can score between 15 and 30 on a test that scores to 99.
Even with all the lowering of standards, the goal in the 1st half of 2006 was lower than that of the same period in 2005.
For example, in this USA Today article we can see that the October/July period in 2005 had a goal of "about 50,000". [link to www.usatoday.com]
The goal fot the whole 2006 year is "80,000 new recruits". As you can see, the 2005 goal was aproximately 100,000 if we take the first half as a reference. I do not have the exact 2005 figures for the whole year.
[link to www.boston.com]
I meant 2nd half, not 1st half.
...for all of the specifics on 2005 vs 2006 recruiting. The FY 2005 was not 100,000; it was 80,000. However, that raises another issue, as you can read above.
I have a master's degree, I run my own business' . . . So we changed them [our rules] to let these people, who meet all the other standards, give them the opportunity to do something meaningful in their lives." - LTC Hilfery
So, joining the Army is doing something meaningful with your life {and I'm not saying it isn't}, but obtaining a master's degree and running your own business isn't?
Gibson isn't a journalist, or else he would have questioned how the Army is meeting its recruiting goals . . . and found out how the armed services are doing the things they usually do when they must "lower the bar to raise the headcount": offer shortened enlistments, monetary bonuses, and the one that ALWAYS works - raise the enlistment age.
I can only hope the Army raises its enlistment age to 62, so Gibson can join . . .
"an American doesn't join the Army because he'll get $2,000."
Then why do they offer it?
"Hilferty also minimized the significance of the age-limit increase by claiming that the rule was changed to allow people such as "marathoners" and businesspeople with master's degrees to join the Army."
So just how many 42 year old MBA marathon runners are lined up to enlist? As compared to unemployed 42 year old High School drop-outs with minor criminal records. Which group is being catered to here?
" . . .51,612 persons have joined the Army. That's more people than fit into Yankee Stadium . . ."
The House That Ruth Built holds 57,545 persons. Looks like you fell short, again . . .
for low enlistment the great economy-people had so many great jobs, they weren't looking to join the military?
Anybody remember that?
So now are people signing up in spite of all those great jobs, or is the GOP finally admitting they're fizzukking up the economy, but it's to support the troops?
Um, the job numbers are deceiving.. because lots of people make their livings selling stuff on eBay.. yeah.. that's the ticket..
Anyways, has anyone heard that one of the standards "lowered" was that the army is now accepting neonazi and racists into the ranks?
Could explain the sudden rash of disgusting and vile acts perpetrated by a very small number of soldiers. Did we have these problems in Afghanistan? I recall a few scattered incidents, but never seemed this bad..
Our military is now being infiltrated by violent hate groups. What a great place for them to receive the training they need to physically carry out their race war at home.
This is sad. So freakin' sad.
I would love to get back in.
I'm sure I don't need to point it out, but I would like to say that I don't appreciate how Gibson turns support for our troops into support for the war.
I love our troops, which is why I don't want them dying for a war I DON'T support.