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 241-270 of 469 total comments.

  • sosguitar 03/22/2009 5:01am

    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).

  • Comm_reply
    Seqoia32 03/22/2009 1:34pm

    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;


  • Comm_reply
    sosguitar 03/23/2009 4:39am

    To answer your question, no. However I don’t believe I misunderstood anything, but even if I did you don’t need to be so rude about it.

    “SEC. 1304, SEC. 125 prohibits “A participant in an approved national service position” from engaging in certain activities."

    My interpretation of that is anyone involved in this program cannot do any of the listed things, even on their own free time. Is this incorrect? Whether I’m right or wrong this bill pretty much destroys the first amendment.

    To anyone who disagrees I encourage you to do the following in this order:

    1) read this article or at least the first sentence of it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

    2) read section 125 of H.R.1388 (the bill I’m talking about)

    Also, this bill is FREAKING HUGE and it seems like it is being rushed through congress. I think more time should have been taken to read and review it before voting on it.

  • Comm_reply
    Lara1967 04/24/2009 1:27am
    Its it our consitutional right to tell Obama hitler regime to stick it if we dont like it… if you dont like our constitutional right please pack your bags and move back to your homeland.
  • Comm_reply
    mpaone 03/22/2009 6:14pm

    Yes, all public employees are prohibited from influencing legislation and lobbying under the Hatch Act of 1939. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatch_Act_of_1939)

  • Comm_reply
    sosguitar 03/23/2009 4:57am

    I wasn’t aware of the Hatch Act of 1939. I read the Wikipedia article you referenced and I must say, it seems to go against free speech in my opinion. “influencing legislation” seems like a very broad term. What exactly would be influencing legislation?

    Writing to congress?
    Telling people that H.R.1388 is unconstitutional?
    Telling people to write to congress?
    Protesting a bill?

    If that’s the case then that’s very unconstitutional.

    Also I don’t think the people in this program would be considered public employees since they are volunteers (don’t you have to earn wages to be considered an employee?).

  • Comm_reply
    Seqoia32 03/23/2009 8:26am

    What you don’t seem to understand is that the prohibitions ONLY apply to the time the person is participating in employment or volunteer activity funded with Federal dollars – NOT THEIR PRIVATE LIFE.

  • Comm_reply
    froboe 03/23/2009 1:12pm

    They need to change the wording in the bill, then, since there is no wording to indicate that this is only applicable while they are performing their work. It just says they can’t participate.

  • Comm_reply
    sosguitar 03/23/2009 3:43pm

    Good call froboe, I think this needs to be clarified. I don’t see anything explicitly stating it’s only during the actual volunteering so I’m still assuming it’s at all times until I’m proven wrong.

    Segoia32, how are you so sure that it’s only during the actual volunteer work? If it’s clearly stated in the bill I’d like to see it. I’ll admit I skimmed through most of the bill so I may have missed it.

  • Comm_reply
    mpaone 03/23/2009 7:27pm

    I can attest to this: It’s only during your service. Also, you cannot advocate in your capacity as a public employee.

    This would be like a social worker using their work ours to lobby the City Council. Can’t do it. But, they could support this legislation on their free time as a private citizen.

    Same goes for national service programs. I ran into this problem a lot during my year of AmeriCorps. I would work on community problems, like hunger, and want to push for better food policy. However, I couldn’t do that during the workday in my capacity as an AmeriCorps member. Though, I would do it all the time on the off-hours.

  • Comm_reply
    mpaone 03/23/2009 7:30pm

    This applies to all public employees under the Hatch Act.

    Remember, this bill does not create new agencies, it just bolsters pre-existing ones, all of which fall subject to previous laws governing the actions of public employees.

  • Comm_reply
    Lara1967 04/24/2009 1:29am

    ahhh flip flop words of coarse…. we know the consitution, some you lack off.

  • WA_patriot 03/22/2009 6:31am


    As far as I can tell they pretty much ALWAYS vote against the will of the people!!!!!

  • Comm_reply
    sosguitar 03/23/2009 5:06am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    It’s funny how on this site(the people) this bill is voted nay 140 to 15, yet the House voted aye 321 to 105. We’ll see about the Senate later today, I don’t think it will be much different though.

  • Comm_reply
    Anonymous 03/24/2009 6:13pm

    That is just it , they don’t care about the will of the people . Don’t you remember what Vice President Chaney said ! I don’t care what the American people think . That sums it up !

  • melzellers 03/22/2009 4:48pm

    Say goodby to your 1st Ammendment. The “GIVE Act” HB 1388." “to prohibit organizations from attempting to influence legislation; organize or engage in protests, petitions, boycotts, or strikes; and assist, promote, or deter union organizing” of the “Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act”. The “GIVE Act” HB 1388 passed by the House on Friday, will be voted on by the Senate Monday 23rd.

    H. Amdt. 49 os HB 1388 is going to make criminals out of the PEACFUL resistance movement. This covers all, even left wing groups who like to protest the war, the environment and etc.

    Yes, the main stream media and leftwing groups such as the “Southern Law Poverty Center” and the ADL will lump movements such as this one with Neo-Nazis, White extremists and etc, just like they did with the militia movements back during the ’90s.

    Please see H.R.1388 “The Give Act” Mein Führer Requires YOU to SERVE 3 Years, (and

  • Comm_reply
    sosguitar 03/23/2009 5:11am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    The main reason we were given our first and second amendment rights is to criticize and rise against tyranny and corruption in government, and now they are trying to take those rights away. Just another step toward forming a Police State…

  • Comm_reply
    Seqoia32 03/23/2009 8:31am

    One more time:

    The prohibitions ONLY apply to the time the person is participating in employment or volunteer activity funded with Federal dollars – NOT THEIR PRIVATE LIFE.

  • Comm_reply
    greeneye 04/23/2009 7:01am

    this government is taking our rights away. Obama is just a puppet of an organization much bigger than the US government. On parts of this Act our kids would no longer belong to us but to the government and they must do what they say. Incredible!!! The People need to realize what is happening before is too late. We must come together as one and fight for our rights and get this country back from the National Federal Reserve Bank they are basically doing what they please with our country to keep control and finally get in place the ONE WORLD ORDER. Its coming guarantee it. and it will start with The U.S , Mexico, and Canada as one.

  • wwstewart 03/22/2009 10:25pm

    This is perhaps the worse bill I have ever seen.

    The group members cannot practice their religion? Yeah, at least not teach anybody God’s word. If that doesn’t violate the First Amendment, I don’t know what does.

    I’m ashamed that so-called conservatives voted for this. To me, that’s almost treason.

  • Comm_reply
    sosguitar 03/23/2009 5:11am
    Link Reply
    + -1


  • Comm_reply
    mpaone 03/23/2009 7:37pm

    This only applies to proselytizing.

    Agencies who host members of national service programs cannot use these volunteers the proselytize. The organizations themselves also cannot have proselytizing as their sole purpose.

    This would be like hiring a member of AmeriCorps at your church to teach bible studies. It wouldn’t be a proper use of public money.

    Also, participating agencies cannot deny community members service based on religious preference. This is the soup after the sermon situation, where you can get a meal, but you have to listen to a sermon first. This is fine to do, but you can’t use government money to do it. It’s a basic instance of separation between church and state.

  • ladalang 03/23/2009 9:09am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    We are now in Nazi Germany. What politician in their right mind could vote for this? Did we not learn anything from Hitler?

  • texascheygirl 03/23/2009 9:50am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    This is against our 13th Amendment, this is FORCED serevtitude, this is a draft. This is no different then the Hitler Youth during WWII, stop this tyranny now!

  • caolila 03/23/2009 10:13am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    THREE DAYS after taking office President Obama laid the cornerstone for the civilian military force and I am not certain that any noticed.


    HR 1388 is more like Stalin’s pioneers – the indoctrination of the young into radical socialism.

  • Citizen25 03/23/2009 10:34am

    I am an Historian and as i read this bill i find that it is about the same as what Hitler did with the youth of his day. the result of which was a whole nation following him and not caring what there order was. as a nation we can not allow this to happen again. this is a terrible idea and this bill should fail.

  • FreedomNJ 03/23/2009 12:18pm
    Link Reply
    + -2

    “People choose to do this in order to get money” – Then it is PAID and not VOLUNTEER. It is a JOBS program using OUR money.

  • FreedomNJ 03/23/2009 12:23pm
    Link Reply
    + -2

    Notice how the Radical Liberals abuse our language: They create a feel-good jobs program and call it “Volunteer”.

    How many Illegal Aliens will this employ? They are not prohibited.

    Vote NO WAY.

  • Comm_reply
    mpaone 03/23/2009 7:47pm

    I don’t find the money argument very convincing.

    For instance, I don’t own a car, and don’t drive on interstate highways. I’m assuming you drive. I’m sure some of my tax money went to pay for a bunch of roads you’ve used.

    Do I have a right (or does it make any sense) for me take away that opportunity for you to drive on that highway? Should I instead say, that if you really want to drive, build your own highway?

  • caolila 03/23/2009 12:38pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    I was shocked that my own republican congresswoman voted for this. WHAT ARE THEY THINKING?

Vote on This Bill

11% Users Support Bill

280 in favor / 2257 opposed

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments