H.R.1388 - The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act

To reauthorize and reform the national service laws. view all titles (15)

All Bill Titles

  • Short: Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act as introduced.
  • Popular: GIVE Act as introduced.
  • Short: Congressional Commission on Civic Service Act as introduced.
  • Official: To reauthorize and reform the national service laws. as introduced.
  • Short: GIVE Act as introduced.
  • 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: Congressional Commission on Civic Service Act as reported to house.
  • Short: Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act as reported to house.
  • Short: GIVE Act as reported to house.
  • Short: Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act as passed house.
  • Short: GIVE Act as passed house.
  • Popular: The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act as introduced.
  • Short: Serve America Act as passed senate.
  • Short: Serve America Act as enacted.
  • Official: A bill entitled "The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act, an Act to reauthorize and reform the national service laws." as introduced.

Comments Feed

Displaying 211-240 of 469 total comments.

  • Comm_reply
    mpaone 03/24/2009 7:55pm

    Okay..

    Okay.. “Today, we don’t need to abolish carbon as an energy source in order to see it’s inefficiencies starkly or understand that the addiction to it is the principal drag on American Capitalism. The evidence is before our eyes. The practice of borrowing a billion dollars each day to buy foreign oil has caused the American dollar to implode. More than a trillion dollars in annual subsidies to coal and oil producers has beggared a nation that four decades ago owned half the globe’s wealth. Carbon dependence has eroded our economic power, destroyed our moral authority, diminished our international influence and prestige, endangered our national security, and damaged our health and landscapes. It is subverting everything we value.”

    Okay.. “Today, we don’t need to abolish carbon as an energy source in order to see it’s inefficiencies starkly or understand that the addiction to it is the principal drag on American Capitalism. The evidence is before our eyes. The practice of borrowing a billion dollars each day to buy foreign oil has caused the American dollar to implode. More than a trillion dollars in annual subsidies to coal and oil producers has beggared a nation that four decades ago owned half the globe’s wealth. Carbon dependence has eroded our economic power, destroyed our moral authority, diminished our international influence and prestige, endangered our national security, and damaged our health and landscapes. It is subverting everything we value.”— Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., a Foreward to The Green Collar Economy by Van Jones

  • Comm_reply
    mpaone 03/24/2009 8:04pm

    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.

  • Comm_reply
    mpaone 03/24/2009 8:06pm

    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.

  • deborahg6 03/18/2009 1:54pm

    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?

  • Comm_reply
    Avelino_Maestas 03/18/2009 2:58pm

    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

  • Comm_reply
    deborahg6 03/19/2009 8:49am

    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?

  • Comm_reply
    ZAPEM 03/20/2009 4:06am

    That’s odd, Mr. Maestas. You didn’t remove the insults made to my posts. I suggest you go back and review them again!

  • LibertyRevolution 03/18/2009 4:36pm

    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

  • daveman 03/19/2009 8:46am

    “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:

    ‘‘© 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

  • deborahg6 03/19/2009 4:16pm

    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…

  • fubaralas 03/19/2009 10:47pm

    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.

  • Comm_reply
    ZAPEM 03/20/2009 4:02am

    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.

  • ZAPEM 03/20/2009 3:57am

    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.

  • BigMark 03/20/2009 5:34am

    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.

  • dyelverton 03/20/2009 5:46am

    Although I have not read the bill from stem to stern; I see too many similarities to Hitler’s Youth.

  • realamerican2 03/20/2009 11:30am

    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

  • roing 03/20/2009 2:12pm

    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.

  • chiefadfp 03/20/2009 6:03pm

    don’t like it, there is a two edge sword!

  • Sammy357 03/20/2009 6:34pm

    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.

  • melissavdh13 03/20/2009 8:18pm

    The Hitler youth

  • JanColdwater 03/21/2009 5:08am

    “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?

  • Comm_reply
    Seqoia32 03/22/2009 1:23pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    It is VERY possible that YOU do not understand what is in this bill.

    Learn to read.

  • nandeane 03/21/2009 11:01am

    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.

  • mpaone 03/21/2009 2:45pm

    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?

  • nandeane 03/21/2009 4:03pm
    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.
  • eecpnurse 03/21/2009 4:49pm

    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!

  • srowley83 03/21/2009 5:37pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    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!

  • Comm_reply
    mpaone 03/22/2009 6:38pm

    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.

  • Comm_reply
    FreedomNJ 03/23/2009 12:20pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    “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.

  • Comm_reply
    mpaone 03/23/2009 7:18pm

    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).


Vote on This Bill

11% Users Support Bill

280 in favor / 2256 opposed
 

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments