'Mandatory youth service' bill advances

This is SCARY!!! Government shouldn't tell me what to do with my time. So what are they going to do? Make me drop out of college, leave my parents and my boyfriend, and travel to a foreign country with a bunch of people I don't know??
Lovely. Just lovely.

This is another socialist idea that is very well intentioned, but gone terribly wrong. If they want to create a program for volunteers then **GREAT** but to force anybody is simply wrong.

They do the same thing with taxes - they force you to pay for programs that you don't want to (e.g., $1M to Mapplethorpe for a picture of himself with a bullwhip up his ass). They can't get you to pay for it any other way, so they force you to.

Let people donate to worthy causes as they see fit. Let kids volunteer as they deem appropriate. I volunteer in many areas that I think helps people. What I do is not for everyone, nor should anybody be forced to volunteer to help.

We need to recognize this for what it is - a very bad idea that is FORCED on people because it won't happen any other way. When you FORCE people to do something, it should be a really big hint.

Here is the bill in its entirety from the rules committee. Unfortunately, I don't now the date on this as it opens in pdf, not a website.
www.rules.house.gov/111/LegText/111_hr1388_txt.pdf

(We can assume this is from 3/17/09 as it is attached to an article of that same date from the Committee on Rules. http://www.rules.house.gov/bills_details.aspx?NewsID=4177)

F this sheet!!!!!!!! its good to volunteer but this might as well be a draft. the plans are in motion. we were founded on a Republic. give me liberty or give me death. we'll have to take to the streets, more blood will be shed, all for people to forget again. americans have a short memory. i treasure history. good luck young people.

Except some of the public on here, who think this means now everyone is going to be forced to go to war.

I suppose you could look at it as the old trying to control the young. There will be problems with this requirement, and out of those problems will arise more restrictions and rules placed on the rest of us.

I would imagine that human nature to not want to be controlled and the desire to grasp every ouncy of power one can lay their hands on will end up typically going very bad.

>< I wish I was home right now....

How is it "voluntary community service" when there are "mandatory public service requirements"?

I'd vote for it. Don't be afraid. Power comes from the bottom up.

I wonder what people would have said if bush would have instituted this and not obama. Would people have been freaking out or being calm and wanting it like they are right now? I think this talk about liberalism and conservatism is just bull sh**. There is no right or left there are no republicans or democrats its all just a show. They all have their own agendas and they rally people for it by going towards their own personal "values" and ways of life. If you look back into the history of political parties you will see the dems and reps change their ideals back and forth with one another several times so really we can see that they are collectivist so who cares if someone is a rep or a dem a cons or a lib because i hope you all realize its all just bull.

public service can be a good thing .but it sounds like there might be a hidden agenda under all of
this.but then again i quit trusting my goverment when
bush got in and i still dont!

my kids have enough shit they went through in school.the admins of the schools are struggling with getting good teachers.some schools already halve a 50% drop out rate. are you kidding?

Here is some language that I initially found troubling, but I think it just applies to activities a participant can partake in "as a participant" of the organization.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 125. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES AND INELIGIBLE ORGANIZATIONS.

‘(a) Prohibited Activities- A participant in an approved national service position under this subtitle may not engage in the following activities:

‘(1) Attempting to influence legislation.

‘(2) Organizing or engaging in protests, petitions, boycotts, or strikes.

‘(3) Assisting, promoting, or deterring union organizing.

‘(4) Impairing existing contracts for services or collective bargaining agreements.

‘(5) Engaging in partisan political activities, or other activities designed to influence the outcome of an election to any public office.

‘(6) Participating in, or endorsing, events or activities that are likely to include advocacy for or against political parties, political platforms, political candidates, proposed legislation, or elected officials.

‘(7) Engaging in religious instruction, conducting worship services, providing instruction as part of a program that includes mandatory religious instruction or worship, constructing or operating facilities devoted to religious instruction or worship, maintaining facilities primarily or inherently devoted to religious instruction or worship, or engaging in any form of religious proselytization.

‘(8) Providing a direct benefit to--

‘(A) a business organized for profit;

‘(B) a labor organization;

‘(C) a partisan political organization;

‘(D) a nonprofit organization that fails to comply with the restrictions contained in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 except that nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent participants from engaging in advocacy activities undertaken at their own initiative; and

‘(E) an organization engaged in the religious activities described in paragraph (7), unless Corporation assistance is not used to support those religious activities.

‘(9) Conducting a voter registration drive or using Corporation funds to conduct a voter registration drive.

‘(10) Such other activities as the Corporation may prohibit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I do not think it means that a participant can't do any of those activities in their free time, I think it just means they can not do those activities "as a participant". In other words, funding can not go to political or religious organizations . . . which is good.

The reasoning behind that interpretation is under (8). To hold that a participant can not at any time partake in any of those activities would mean that under (8), the participant would have to be unemployed.

Any thoughts on this interpretation?

This legislation is LONG
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h1388/text?version=pcs&nid=t0:pcs:417

However, with the miracle of the interwebs we can search the document for specific words, like "mandatory". The word "mandatory" comes up only twice in the legislation.

The second one describes that programs with mandatory religious instruction are ineligible for funds from this legislation. That is definitely not the "mandatory" service we are talking about.

The first one is a little trickier. It details the types of organizations that Americorps type corporations can give grants to using appropriated funds. One of these types of eligible organizations is one where service-learning is mandatory. However, that isn't saying that it is mandatory to take part in the program to begin with . . . at least that's my interpretation of the legislation.

So if anyone can point to language that shows where enrollment in service programs is mandatory, please do. I for one, can't find it and I suspect it possibly doesn't exist.

Here is some of that legislation:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a) In General- From the amounts appropriated to carry out this part for a fiscal year, the Corporation may make grants and fixed-amount grants (in accordance with section 129(l)) with eligible entities for activities described in subsection (c).

‘(b) Definitions- For purposes of this part, the following definitions apply:

‘(1) ELIGIBLE ENTITIES- The term ‘eligible entity’ means a State education agency, a State Commission, a Territory, an Indian tribe, an institution of higher education, or a public or private nonprofit organization (including community-based organizations), a public or private elementary or secondary school, a local educational agency, or a consortia of such entities, where a consortia of two or more such entities may also include a for-profit organization.

‘(2) YOUTH ENGAGEMENT ZONE- The term ‘youth engagement zone’ means the area in which a youth engagement zone program is carried out.

‘(3) YOUTH ENGAGEMENT ZONE PROGRAM- The term ‘youth engagement zone program’ means a service learning program in which members of an eligible partnership described in paragraph (4) collaborate to provide coordinated school-based or community-based service learning opportunities, to address a specific community challenge, for an increasing percentage of out-of-school youth and secondary school students served by local educational agencies where--

‘(A) not less than 90 percent of the students participate in service-learning activities as part of the program; or

‘(B) service-learning is a mandatory part of the curriculum in all of the secondary schools served by the local educational agency.

Massanova, I going to just mention one Bill to answer your question. It was called the G.I. Bill. The men and women returning home from WWII went to college in record numbers and created the largest middle class the world has ever known. This bill is the same thing, minus the getting shot at part. If I could have picked-up trash every weekend in high school and avoided the nightmare of Sallie Mae's Student Loans, I'd be a much happier camper today and my community would be cleaner.

All I can say is that if the Bush Adminstration tried this all you people who are cheerleading this bill would be moving to Canada.

Plus this bill is being pushed by Israeli Zionist Rahm Emanuel. He wrote about it in his book, Big Plans for Ammerica. Rahm Emanuel's father was a terrorist involved in blowing up buildings and driving Palestinians off their land.

This stinks to high heaven. When was the last bill that Congress wrote that actually benefited anyone?

I hope all you Americans are getting ready to serve your ur almighty Fuhrer. No more sitting around watching reality TV. haha

Yes we can't! Yes we can't! I mean... Yes we can! Yes we can?

This has NOTHING to do with "serving ones country" when one is "voluntarily obligated" to "serve" by the decree of the government.

Forced volunteerism is nothing more than indebted servitude.

Pareo Nullus

we talked about this the other day and people said oh they are just thinking about it,

wake up! this stuff did not work before and it will not work now.

it is a waste of money and the programs will fall apart as the opposing party picks away at the funding.or the economy tanks further.

community service is a business. the jails get paid for it . the courts use it for man hours against fines. time from jail taken off which saves the tax payers money.

Oh are you all NOT TRUSTING YOUR MAN OBAMA???

WHERE WERE YOU when he CAMPAIGNED on this VERY ISSUE?

Blinded by the HOPE? or the CHANGE?

just curious. damn.

Anyone ever heard of the 13th Amendment. I'm having a difficult time figuring out if the Imposter in Chief is more National Socialist or Marxist. I guess he will appoint Blockleiters now.

Volunteerism is a good thing, beneficial to everyone it touches HOWEVER, government mandated volunteerism is involuntary servitude and is wrong. Personal responsibility cannot and should not be government imposed.

I can't belive people are buying into this community service crap. My parents brought me up telling me about the draft in vietnam and how they would never let something like that happen to me, and im not gona let my kids ordered around by anyone else but me

This can do nothing but strengthen character. Have people do volunteer work to help the people who truly need help. People in their community. There would need to be a dress code, etc.

I think that seeing true poverty in other countries is what "grounded" me forever, and I will not ever be sorry that I was in those places, I only wish I could have done more.

Requiring volunteerism sounds funny, but let's just call it community service.

I support getting the increasingly obese child population off of the video games, requiring service, and stirring up xenophobic communities.

I don't like the possibility of squelching dissent, but I strongly doubt that can happen. I wouldn't let it happen to me regardless.

If you think it's such a great idea what are you waiting for? Go sign up now. Get to work. theres plenty of things you could be doing right now to make this country better yet you sit here and tell others on current how great it is. Each and every minute you sit on a computer is a minute you could be out "volunteering" So get off the computer and get to work. What are you waiting for?

Great idea. I was planning to join the Ameri-core anyway.

Why do I think this is a good idea?

I. Americans are generally apathetic whiny children.

II. This will help devlop community bonds and relationships.

III. Many modern nations that are democracies of some sort have similar programs, here's an incomplete list.

Austria
Denmark
Finland
Germany
Norway
Sweden

And soon to be on the list The United States of America.

Wow, so those are authoritarian fascist nations that take individual liberty away? I didn't think so.

any kind of service that I or my family will be forced into will not be accepted...i am a free being...therefore being controlled and ordered does not fit into my life..it will only awaken the rebel.I only wish to live peacefully among other peaceful free people.I dont get down with robots.
If they want a madatory service act it should be to kick out the private bankers and come up with a new economic plan all together..The Greenback would be kool to bring back..or something similar..
namaste

"Mandatory volunteering?" Oxymoron. I can see this having many throwing the term 'socialism' around left and right. Why not just call it a 'draft for a good cause?'

This one smells fishy. If there is no hype on this bill, media coverage and all, it's bad. What exactly is our government trying to use this bill for? Perhaps to enlish our youth (force them) to fight the war on drugs? It makes sense to me because that is the next war we're going to fight.

I volunteered in high school and as an adult. It was by choice and my places of choice.
This bill will force young adults to do specified work with multiple stipulations.
So it is NOT volunteering!
We should encourage volunteering, and the individual decides where. Like at a hospital, a long term care facility, a children's organization or school, meals-on-wheels, habitat for humanity.... the persons choice. And then get the credit for volunteering.

bad idea.investigate it further.

Agorful, going back to your first post, just exactly how do you "enlist for a draft"?? Oxymoron at best and ignorant of the process at worst.

I agree, we should look at this one a little closer. I have heard grumblings that the Americorp would offer the same deal as the I.G. Bill to kids who served in their communities. I have heard no talk of sending people over seas to serve. Granted, I have not read the entire Bill.

I can't imagine where we'd be with a whole nation of Eagle Scouts. Can you?

This one is the poster child for more investigation and discussion. It's hard to believe that it hasn't had more media coverage.

You may think you know what this bill is all about, but the reality is, you know even less than the politicians who argue they haven't had adequate time to even read it.

I say why rushed something this big? Why not discuss the specifics of the bill? Why not have adequate time to consider the bill and allow for some feedback from the public?

On the surface, it would be a wonderful idea to have our young serve a limited amount of time helping their country. I would be for it.

But this bill speeding its way through our legislature has some very dangerous verbiage. It's a very dangerous bill and those who are presenting it are rushing it passed our representatives in hopes there will be no time to read and understand all of its agenda. Scrutiny? There's hardly been anytime to read it. How can one properly scrutinize legislation that hasn't even been read in its entirety?

How many Reps were able to read, absorb, understand, debate, then return home to adequately inform/educate their constituents and return to Washington with the confidence needed to vote yes or no on this issue? NONE. And while it may not be necessary to get feedback from one's constituents on well known issues, this was not such a bill. This was presented by an Obama administration which had been in office less than 90 days! Suddenly, everyone on the democrat side of the isle KNEW exactly what was in the bill and how their constituents would vote.

For fear of sounding like a "conservative" or right wing cook, I'm reluctant to point out another dangerous part of this legislation. But, and let the finger pointing and name calling begin, here goes...

The bill also restricts affiliations to organized social or religious groups. While serving, the bill states you will not be allowed to congregate with such groups identified as having conflicting views with the government. No big deal on the surface. I mean who would want a soldier going to regular meetings of an extreme pro-NAZI organization. But the bill allows the government to identify which groups it considers dangerous. So, if the government doesn't like what the Baptists are saying, they could add this dangerous organization to the list and anyone who is serving or could be recalled for service would be restricted from going to church or having contact with anyone affiliated with the Baptist community.

There I said it.

Another piece of the bill states that anyone who serves in the Americorps brigade is legally bound to support the U.S. government without resistance. The bill states that any person, whether actively serving or who has served the mandatory time period, can NEVER demonstrate, protest, assemble or debate against the policies of the government or it's leaders. It specifically identifies speaking out against the government as insubordination and suggests the offenders be segregated from the general population while serving out their consequences.

Vague language leaves so much power to the government over the lives of its citizens. One can be held without trial and treated as a traitor at very whim of speaking out against the government.

I don't feel like a conservative, and I know I don't speak for that demographic, but I would like to point out a few "problems" with this Americorps bill.

Like so many other great ideas, that on the surface have wonderful appeal to the general public, this bill has hidden in it, some very dangerous verbiage.

For example, one must serve, but once you have served, you're obligated to be "recalled" for service at the desire of the government. This means you could be expected to serve your government by traveling to foreign countries and assisting the agenda however and whenever your government sees fit. There need not be a state of war declared by congress. There need not be any overt purpose at all. All that needs to happen is your government requires your assistance and you will be forced to serve where ever and whenever your government requests.

In reality, you will be taken from your family/job/community and sent to another city, state or country to serve your government for as long as they determine you're needed.

Most Americans would agree to enlist for a draft, in the time of War against our great nation. But few would agree to jump on a train/plane/ship and travel far from their homes only to serve as a civilian worker in a foreign land.

tons of nations have mandatory service. it has nothing to do with personal liberty and everything to do with serving your country and being engaged in your community. arguably america would not be so fucked if people were engaged rather than sitting around bitching. Bush, for instance, never would have won office. I'm tired of hearing conservatives talk about how great america is and yada yada and then refusing to do anything to benefit the nation. if you don't wanna help you can...what's the line conservatives?...

"geeet out"

I can't wait to see how this one goes over. I think it's a great idea. I want to see if the often parroted Conservative ideal of "personal responsibility" also includes responibility to serve ones community and country or will this call to service be labeled as Socialist.