Every kid at some point becomes convinced that a parent won't be coming home.
The unexplained absence usually ends up being due to nothing more serious than a flat tire or undercharged cellphone. But the children of police officers and firefighters grow up with special reason for worry — especially after 9/11.
This week's 12th annual remembrances of the terrorist attacks in lower Manhattan brought the familiar memorial services and moments of silence, and a legislative push of more recent vintage for a bill that extends a 2003 measure granting 10 "legacy points" on the civil service exam to a certain class of applicants for public safety jobs: the children or siblings of workers in those fields who died in the line of duty.
The most pressing reasons for the legislation, which passed both houses with overwhelming support and is headed to Gov. Andrew Cuomo's desk, are inconsistencies in the way siblings and children receive bonus points, and a lack of clarity on the question of whether a death that might reasonably be seen as the result of lingering effects of work at ground zero could activate the benefit.
These deficiencies have knocked at least a dozen children of 9/11 responders far down the list of applicants for the most recent class of New York City Fire Department recruits. The extra 10 points can boost a given candidate ahead of hundreds of other competitors.
None but the heartless would want to see these young people fail to realize the dream of following in their parents' footsteps. And if we're going to have a legacy point system, it would be nice if it were coherent and followed the original legislative intent of the law.
But my own thinking is that the only thing better than Cuomo signing the bill would be a broader legislative movement to scrap the system altogether.
Don't get me wrong: I'm wholly in favor of the idea of successive generations laboring at the same trade, whether it's journalism, building furniture or protecting the public. And I'm not a knee-jerk opponent of nepotism, which has in various circuitous ways given this nation presidents such as John Quincy Adams and attorneys general like Robert F. Kennedy (and governors like Andrew Cuomo, I suppose).
But I can't support either practice being codified in law.
The lack of fairness in the system becomes apparent once you begin to think about the people who can't take advantage of it. There is, for example, no similar benefit handed to the families of the equally self-sacrificing men and women who fought and died in Iraq and Afghanistan. The children and siblings of military personnel aren't guaranteed a leg up when applying for West Point or the Naval Academy. Does a general's son or daughter get an extra look, a few more minutes at the admissions office? I wouldn't bet against it — but it's not required in statute.
There's a very practical reason for maintaining a level playing field beyond the simple but compelling idea that America is supposed to be a meritocracy. Especially in the realm of public safety, we should be seeking the best people, which under the current system means those who earn top score in the civil service application process. Legacy points undermine the scorecard.
Supporters of the current system would probably note that affirmative action programs risk a similar skewing effect, and they'd be right. But those policies exist to correct decades, even centuries of injustice — racial preference battling racism — while legacy points seek to make up for the loss of a family member in tragic circumstances. That's not a remedy; there is no way to plug that sort of hole.
As a society, we owe many things to the families of those professionals who give what Lincoln called "the last full measure of devotion," including the sort of financial support that allows their children to pursue whatever career they might choose. But we don't owe those children a career advantage in their parents' line of work.
This country has done far more irresponsible things in its sometimes flailing reactions to 9/11, and I'm sure that the legacy points system has put many worthy candidates in our firehouses and police stations.
But how many more deserving candidates lost out on their chance to serve simply because they didn't lose a loved one?
cseiler@timesunion.com • 518-454-5619