U.S. Congress - H.R.1388 GIVE Act
H.R.1388 - GIVE Act
A bill entitled "The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act, an Act to reauthorize and reform the national service laws." view all titles (14)
All Bill Titles
- Short: Serve America Act as enacted.
- Short: Serve America Act as passed senate.
- Popular: The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act as introduced.
- Short: GIVE Act as passed house.
- Short: Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act as passed house.
- Short: Congressional Commission on Civic Service Act as reported to house.
- Short: GIVE Act as reported to house.
- Short: Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act as reported to house.
- Official: A bill entitled "The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act, an Act to reauthorize and reform the national service laws." as amended by senate.
- Short: GIVE Act as introduced.
- Official: To reauthorize and reform the national service laws. as introduced.
- Short: Congressional Commission on Civic Service Act as introduced.
- Popular: GIVE Act as introduced.
- Short: Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act as introduced.
Bill's Views
- Today: 419
- Past Seven Days: 2,845
- All-Time: 258,338
10%
Users Support Bill
227 in favor / 2072 opposed
Write Your
Representative
-
Share This Bill
More Share via Email
Sort By
Comments Feed ?
What's this?
OpenCongress comment boards are an open forum for discussion. Let's build public knowledge about Congress together, so please keep the discussion civil -- no harsh language, subject to our community Comment Policy. Do not post any information here (for example, your name or email) that you do not wish to be public.
Filter Comments to a Rating of at least
What's this?
The Ratings Filter allows you to determine how many user comments to view on pages here on OpenCongress. Setting the filter higher (towards 10) allows you to see only the comments rated "most helpful" by users, while setting the filter lower (towards 0) allows you to see more comments on a page.
Displaying 211-240 of 463 total comments.
We pay a trillion of your tax dollars a year to coal and oil companies, and a national service bill is what is ruining our nation? This bill would cost you three dollars a year. Is that unaffordable?
My point is, if we prune down on programs like these, we are squabbling over pennies, while the robber barons are in the next room sleeping on beds of money. Service programs are not our enemy.
I have a question. Why were the first comments removed that were in opposition to this bill? They were the very earliest remarks. Now, only to show comments from marspars and mpaone at the beginning of the comment section?
deborahg6, what you're seeing is a function of the OpenCongress rating system. Users can rate comments up or down, and if enough users rate a comment "no" then it will be pushed below the default threshold for viewing comments. The comment is still there, and to make it visible adjust your rating filter at the top of the page.
I have deleted some comments that were in violation of the OpenCongress Terms of Use, but those comments were in the second page, not at the beginning.
-Avelino, OpenCongress Community Manager
Wow, the filtering function and rating system is quite confusing for most users. I'm not sure what the purpose of it is, but I believe it is unfair. I can understand violating terms of use, but to "filter" comments based on user ratings? Is this site not comfortable with Freedom of Speech?
That's odd, Mr. Maestas. You didn't remove the insults made to my posts. I suggest you go back and review them again!
Wake up people, there is no difference between the Bush / Obama PUPPET Admin.
We have been sold out in more ways than we can even count
Go read the Constitution and Declaration again... Your instructions are included in those founding documents
"SEC. 1302. REQUIRED AND ELIGIBLE NATIONAL SERVICE PROGRAMS."
‘‘(a) REQUIRED NATIONAL SERVICE CORPS.—The recipient of a grant under section 121(a) and each Federal agency operating or supporting a national service program under section 121(b) shall, directly or through grants or subgrants to other entities, carry out or support the following national service corps, as full- or part-time corps, including during the summer months, to address unmet educational, health, veteran, or environmental needs:
‘‘(c) PRIORITIES FOR CERTAIN REQUIRED CORPS.—In awarding financial assistance and approved national service positions to eligible entities proposed to carry out the required corps described in subsection (a)—"
"service-learning is a mandatory part of the curriculum in all of the secondary schools served by the local educational agency."
Saul Alinsky-style here?
Rahm Emanual wants to make this mandatory.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtDSwyCPEsQ
http://www.infowars.com/house-passes-mandatory-national-service-bill/
Great article on this bill. Hope the Congressmen/women are paying attention to their constituents, because we are paying attention to them. 2 more years, 2 more years...
Here is the link to "The Plan" by Rahm Emanuel and Bruce Reed. Chapter five(Ask Not: Universal Citizen Service) is viewable in the Google Book Search preview:
http://books.google.com/books?id=cODEAfC_t9AC&printsec=frontcover
I love the part where it says "This is not a draft. We repeat: this is not a draft" then goes on to say "the nation will enlist them".
And again from this bill:
Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds.
and:
service-learning is a mandatory part
of the curriculum in all of the secondary schools
served by the local educational agency.
Exactly, fubar. This bill was intentional to attempt to rip the parental control from the parent to the government and it's not going to happen. It's all double-speak and when they use double-speak, they are trying to confuse people through lying.
This bill is now being protested in NJ and the names of those who voted for it taken. It is unconstitutional and the lawyers have already been notified to institute suit against the government for any attempts to establish mandatory service or favortism towards those who volunteer. End of story. See you at the supreme court.
We have a constitutional amendment that abolished slavery.
That is the 13th Amendment, It states;
‘Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for a crime… shall exist within the United States of America.’
Washington D.C. must think it is a crime to attend school.
Although I have not read the bill from stem to stern; I see too many similarities to Hitler's Youth.
i feel this is a very bad bill. we do not need people the our so called gov. telling me i have to volenteer and i can,t have my freedom as an american.are we like the hitler goverment. ifeel our freedoms are almost gone by this pres.is he trying to make this country communisum.bad bad bill
This program looks to me like it can develop into a socialist indoctrination of our impressionable youth. The idea is here in section #6104. Now really 'reasonable mandatory', just what kind of double talk is this? This looks very much like 'Hitler Jugend Program' in Nazi Germany. It too was mandatory and parents could not trust their own children if the parents believed different than the government taught them. This program of Obama's is dangerous. Federal Government indoctrination of our children is Dangerous my friends.
section, #6104: (6) Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds.
don't like it, there is a two edge sword!
This Bill is so wrong and inappropriate on many levels. It reminds me of a time back in the 30's and 40's when this type of service was expected in countries who were our adversaries. This is also going to be a very large government expenditure that we cannot afford. I have already informed by elected officials that unless this passes the smell test on constitutionality AND ethics, it should not be considered or given an up vote. I can tell by the infothough, they did not care to listen to me.
The Hitler youth
"To reauthorize and reform the national service laws." Is it possible that YOU who are FOR this bill simply don’t understand FREEDOM? It is AGAINST the 13th amendment to even have such "service" when it becomes INVOLUNTARY of which this bill does. Rahm Emanuel and Obama himself have openly stated that this is REQUIRED/MANDATORY national service. They used the words "Charity" and "volunteerism” to explain it and neither of those words describe what it is because those words are contrary to REQUIRED & MANDATORY and MANDATORY & REQUIRED is CONTRARY to the 13th Amendment. Say what you like but this is slavery. I don’t want to hear about the compensation one will get to be MADE to do something “charitable”. Why doesn’t the government do us all a “CHARITABLE” favor and GET LOST before we the people “REQUIRE” they do so?
It is VERY possible that YOU do not understand what is in this bill.
Learn to read.
As a past AmeriCorps & V.I.S.T.A. member, I commend the House for passing this bill. The Corporation for National Service, under which, AmeriCorps, Peace Corps, and Senior Corps members gratefully serve thier communities and fellow Americans. I joined AmeriCorps in 2000 and served for seven years in AmeriCorps as a member and later as a program director. The local nonprofit organization that I served along with a team of 20 AmeriCorps members, provided in-home respite to caregivers of Alzheimers and dementia clients. This service was free to the families. In return, we received a chance "To Make a Difference" in local families, $10,000 a year for 1700 hours of community service, an education award of $4,725.00. More importantly, we served with AmeriCorps members from all across America and formed friendships with those of different backgrounds, ages and cultural diversity.
It seems throughout this conversation that everyone's serious gripe is with the study to research mandatory community service, on the grounds that people object to the future possibility of this idea being enacted.
Here is my suggestion / question to everyone: Are people willing to vouch for this bill if that clause were to be removed, and there would be no study performed on mandatory service?
It seems that, rather than scrap it, the logical conclusion to your objections would be to amend the bill, removing that part, keeping these programs optional, job-like opportunities.
What do people think?
Yes, the logical conclusion to objections: would be to amend the bill, removing the mandatory service,(which makes absolutely no sense, force people to serve, I DON'T THINK SO!). How could you even manage such a program. It is difficult enough to manage volunteers that are dedicated and willing to serve. Most of these "volunteer opportunies" are "in the field". Think Hurricane Katrina aftermath, in-home repairs for the elderly, nursing homes, handicapped children classes. THINK: nonprofit liability, they are the ones with the insurance liability.
Nazi Germany here we come! obama is trying to bankrupt this country and then he is going to have his "civilian service corp" to ensure people obey his laws and he will probably take our weapons as well...this is scary who would support this well the votes on this page speak fro themselves 100 against and 11 for!
Why is the US Government spending money we do not have. If this program is by choice fine, if it is mandatory no. This is the same type of program (if mandatory) that started the nazi army and we all know how that ended!
We should probably stop borrowing 1 billion dollars per day from other countries (China) to pay for oil. Daily. Complaining about this spending is a lot like cutting back on toilet paper while paying off a mortgage on mansion.
"We should probably stop borrowing 1 billion dollars per day from other countries (China) to pay for oil."
Then stop spending money! Stop paying volunteers and calling it volunteer.
My point was that, if you are a serious fiscal conservative, arguing over this bill is counterproductive. It would make much more practical sense to be supporting the creation of clean energy legislation. In other words, we can afford this bill. It is a small, sustainable investment. Oil addiction is a big, unsustainable investment.
Cutting small programs to pay for failed policies and bad ideas (energy for example) is a buying a mansion without any money left for toilet paper.
The answer is not to stop buying toilet paper. The first thing to do is buy the toilet paper (a worthy investment), and then sell back the mansion (the bad idea).
I'm surprised nobody has commented on "‘SEC. 125. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES AND INELIGIBLE ORGANIZATIONS.". I don't see how it could be much more unconstitutional. It forces any participants to forfeit most of their 1st amendment rights. I know if this gets passed that eventually they will try to make it mandatory, which would be even more unconstitutional. I can't believe this has already passed through the house, this is crazy. Say hello to the Obama youth (AKA Hitler youth reborn).
You have a problem with reading comprehension.
SEC. 1304, SEC. 125 prohibits "A participant in an approved national service position" from engaging in certain activities.
So you think the govt. should fund volunteer programs for people to:
-influence legislation;
-organize or engage in protests, petitions, boycotts, or strikes;
-assist, promote, or deter union organizing;
-engage in partisan political activities, or other activities designed to influence the outcome of an election to any public office;
etc?