Profile
Search
Register
Log in
MSNBC today (1/17) - Barack Obama's plans for Civil Service
View previous topic | View next topic >

Post new topic Reply to topic
Strange Famous Forum > Social stuff. Political stuff. KNOWMORE

Author Message
erich



Joined: 15 May 2005
Posts: 3048
 Reply with quote  

frig.

Last edited by erich on Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:02 pm; edited 1 time in total
Post Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:01 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
erich



Joined: 15 May 2005
Posts: 3048
 Reply with quote  

neveragainlikesheep wrote:
4k for 100 hours a year? fucking hell. thats awesome.


im saying. ive done a 100 hours this fiscal year, easily. fuck college, where's my money?
Post Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:01 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
Jascha



Joined: 31 Mar 2005
Posts: 3936
Location: Seoul, SK
 Reply with quote  

40 bucks an hour.

Nobody in college makes that kind of money, short of entrepeneurial computerfucks.
Post Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:58 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Stumbleweed



Joined: 09 Mar 2005
Posts: 9740
Location: Denver
 Reply with quote  

Yeah, this is great.. I wasn't hot on the REQUIRED service that was being floated at some point, but this service-for-college is perfect. And a great fucking deal.
Post Mon Jan 19, 2009 1:03 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
redball



Joined: 12 May 2006
Posts: 6871
Location: Northern New Jersey
 Reply with quote  

from the MLK thread:

happy_ wrote:
It just bothers me how they are wrapping their plans of the un-libertarian idea of mandatory state service in the exterior of Martin Luther King Jr and the battle for fairness in government and etc. It is disgusting, and truly politics as usual.


Back up your claims here first, troll_. Forming and acting upon strong opinions based on misinformation and half truths, you are politics as usual.
Post Mon Jan 19, 2009 2:53 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
happy_
crappy_


Joined: 30 Dec 2008
Posts: 117
 Reply with quote  

Wow... thanks for being rude. Do you think anyone would actually answer your question if you spoke that to them?




http://www.barackobama.com/issues/service/



"Obama and Biden will set a goal that all middle and high school students do 50 hours of community service a year. "


"Require 100 Hours of Service in College"



There's the videos and transcripts and books of Rahm Emanuel chief of staff who has desired and publicly spoken about a "universal civil defense force" for a long time.


Its a whole lot of stuff, and i really only point this out for anyone who maybe was unsure at first. I am not going to fall into this namecalling and hate.
Post Mon Jan 19, 2009 3:01 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
redball



Joined: 12 May 2006
Posts: 6871
Location: Northern New Jersey
 Reply with quote  

I already addressed the "Require 100 Hours" bit, why are you still citing that? Don't play the victim here. You're still spreading misinformation while completely ignoring those who try to correct you. It's textbook trolling.

If you're so upset by it then provide some real information, not quotes out of context.

Here's the middle & high school plan:


Quote:

Expand Service-Learning in Our Nation’s Schools: In November, Barack Obama laid out a comprehensive
plan to provide all Americans with a world-class education and give our schools a substantial infusion of funds
to support teachers and principals and improve student learning. That plan conditions that assistance on school
districts developing programs to engage students in service opportunities. Obama and Biden believe that middle
and high school students should be expected to engage in community service for 50 hours annually during the
school year or summer months. They will develop national guidelines for service-learning and community
service programs, and will give schools better tools both to develop successful programs and to document the
experience of students at all levels. They will encourage programs that engage with community partners to
expand opportunities for community service and service-learning opportunities, so that students can apply what
they learn in the classroom to authentic situations that help the community. These programs will also involve
citizens from the community engaging students in service opportunities through the Classroom Corps.


First, the schools only have to participate in this to obtain federal assistance. Any school that doesn't get this assistance would have no obligation to develop these programs. Second, you are not mandated to attend high school, and you can always home school. Third, how is this worse than most of the mandatory bullshit that schools force on students? I'd rather go to 100 hours of community service than sit through one bullshit pep rally.

It's a whole lot of stuff.... that you are way too lazy to form into any kind of argument.
Post Mon Jan 19, 2009 3:16 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
erich



Joined: 15 May 2005
Posts: 3048
 Reply with quote  

i went to a public high school and something like 120 hours of community service was required for graduation. i had been traveling with my sister's CYO colorguard, setting up and tearing down props, so whenever i needed community service hours for anything (confirmation class, court orders, etc.) she wrote up whatever i needed. now, i do freelance tech work for a living- something the community service provided great experience for, but was totally not on my mind at the time.

i just imagine what it would be like if every person under the age of 18 who is arrested on drug related charges, was sentenced to a mandatory 20-30 hours of community service a week, in addition to school. teach them to be useful, in whatever capacity their own community needs. maybe they'd complain about being forced to work, but at least they wouldn't be in jail. or worse, useless, like our new friend crappy_ here.
Post Mon Jan 19, 2009 5:39 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
O2K
SFF has a stalker.


Joined: 14 Jul 2004
Posts: 1856
Location: Orange County
 Reply with quote  

im kind of with happy_ here. i dont like the mandatory shit. what i dont need the 4000 dollars. i dont want to volunteer for shit i have no interest in volunteering for. when i first read about this service i disagreed with it and i still do. until i get more information that changes my mind i will still disagree with it.
Post Mon Jan 19, 2009 5:43 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
xGasPricesx



Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 1568
 Reply with quote  

O2K wrote:
im kind of with happy_ here. i dont like the mandatory shit. what i dont need the 4000 dollars. i dont want to volunteer for shit i have no interest in volunteering for. when i first read about this service i disagreed with it and i still do. until i get more information that changes my mind i will still disagree with it.


Go re-read Redball's posts, the shit ain't mandatory.
Post Mon Jan 19, 2009 5:48 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
breakreep
homophobic yet curious


Joined: 27 Sep 2004
Posts: 6627
Location: Fifth Jerusalem
 Reply with quote  

xGasPricesx wrote:
O2K wrote:
im kind of with happy_ here. i dont like the mandatory shit. what i dont need the 4000 dollars. i dont want to volunteer for shit i have no interest in volunteering for. when i first read about this service i disagreed with it and i still do. until i get more information that changes my mind i will still disagree with it.


Go re-read Redball's posts, the shit ain't mandatory.


Normally I'd call it for O2K making a joke, but ever since I realized his intense Obama tinfoilism is for real I'm just not sure about anything anymore. But yeah. If he's being serious, this is as stupid as anything happy's written on the topic, which would explain why they agree.
Post Mon Jan 19, 2009 6:27 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
O2K
SFF has a stalker.


Joined: 14 Jul 2004
Posts: 1856
Location: Orange County
 Reply with quote  

xGasPricesx wrote:
O2K wrote:
im kind of with happy_ here. i dont like the mandatory shit. what i dont need the 4000 dollars. i dont want to volunteer for shit i have no interest in volunteering for. when i first read about this service i disagreed with it and i still do. until i get more information that changes my mind i will still disagree with it.


Go re-read Redball's posts, the shit ain't mandatory.


to be honest i didnt read redballs post. i read that one other obama thread, then this one is correspondence except it was a skimming. most 12 page threads end up with one person disagreeing with the majority and a bunch of bickering. I'll check his thread however from all the flyers that were given to be about this and all that ive read so far it came off as mandatory not to mention that nonsense interview with Rahm Emmanuel. If its not mandatory then theres no real need for discussion.
Post Mon Jan 19, 2009 6:36 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
redball



Joined: 12 May 2006
Posts: 6871
Location: Northern New Jersey
 Reply with quote  

To be fair, he finally found a context in which it would be mandatory for most people. Public schools usually rely on federal assistance, thus it would be effectively mandatory for anyone who attends public schools. Though, it is not uncommon that some activities in public schools require public service, this just brings everyone else in line.

So, there we have a near mandate.

But... what's so horrible about this considering all the other mandates that accompany public schooling? That's the next level of this discussion, as the first level is to even figure out if there's a mandate to begin with. Now, is it bad and if so why?

When I was in gifted classes in grade school it was mandatory that every few weeks we helped out the handicapped class down the hall. I probably put in close to 50 hours of that before middle school. In high school I often helped my mother with fundraisers and other events, spending more time on public service.

Later, when I fucked up and landed in the juvenile court system I had to spend time in a "rehabilitation center" (as opposed to a detention center, it was not drug rehab). Every day we had to help at the nursing home next door and clean the park adjacent to it. I was there for a month and easily put in over 100 hours of service.

After that, while I was in college, I worked several elections. My first paying job serving the community. I volunteered to do this. Before I was 18 I was able to work at the county seat collecting and organizing ballots as they came in from various districts. Once I turned 18 I was able to serve as a judge working at the polls. My third election as a judge I took a class and served as the presiding judge. At that point I was making $100 for a 16 hour day.

What's the point of all of this? It's to say that community service didn't kill me. It made me better. Most of what I did was free. Some of it was mandatory, and some of it was voluntary. Never did it approach the monetary benefits that Obama is proposing for college students. So, even if there is a mandate, what exactly is the harm?
Post Mon Jan 19, 2009 6:42 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
redball



Joined: 12 May 2006
Posts: 6871
Location: Northern New Jersey
 Reply with quote  

I know our stubborn troll friend is no longer with us, but I saw this article and immediately thought of this thread. Assuming that FactCheck's facts are in order, which they usually are, and their interpretation is good, they've even debunked the final potential mandatory program. Turns out the bill only authorized adding mandatory service to the federally funded schools but it wouldn't require it be implemented.

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/is_congress_creating_a_mandatory_public_service.html


Quote:

Q:

Is Congress creating a mandatory public service system? Are participants not allowed to go to church?
Really needing an article from you guys on this new proposed legislation H.R. 1388 (GIVE Act). I have been getting all kinds of e-mails from people claiming that bill calls for mandatory service and in violation of our 13th amendment , and that I should call my congressman and tell them that this bill is modern day slavery. I have also received e-mails saying that service would still be voluntary and that the bill is just expanding current volunteer opportunities. I have read portions of the bill that I could find and am unable to tell exactly what the bill is calling for (mandatory vs. volunteer service?). There is a lot of confusion out there right now regarding this very important legislation and was hoping you guys could shed some light.
A:

The national service bill does not mandate that youth must participate nor does it forbid anyone who does participate from going to church.
Bookmark and Share

We have received several inquiries about this bill, which has passed both the House and Senate with significant bipartisan support. Some e-mails and conservative Web sites say it requires the government to draw up plans for a “mandatory service requirement for all able young people.” Others say the bill forbids participants from attending church.

These claims are false. Neither the House-passed bill nor the Senate-passed version says these things.

H.R. 1388 was introduced in the House on March 9. It passed the House a week later by a vote of 321 - 105, with nearly all Democrats and 70 Republicans supporting it. It passed the Senate on March 26, 79 - 19. Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch, a cosponsor of the Senate legislation, called it "probably the most bipartisan bill we will see on the Senate floor this year." For the record, 22 Republicans voted yes, and 19 – the only senators who opposed the bill – voted no.

House Republicans who approved of the bill said in the House committee report: "[W]e applaud the inclusion of reforms that Committee Republicans have long championed to ensure that recipients of taxpayer funds are held accountable for results. We are pleased to join with the Majority in supporting bipartisan efforts to strengthen the national service laws and improve service delivery throughout the country."

Called the GIVE Act ("Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act") in the House and the "Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act" in the Senate, the legislation reauthorizes and expands established national service programs including VISTA (Volunteers in Service to America) and the National Civilian Community Corps, both of which are AmeriCorps programs. The House bill sets a goal of having 250,000 yearly participants in such programs by 2014; the Senate bill says there should be that many national service positions by 2017. About 75,000 adults participate in AmeriCorps each year now; there are 4 million people total in various national community service programs, according to AmeriCorps.

The act also aims to increase volunteer and public service opportunities, including opportunities for retirees and the Baby Boom generation, and to "support institutions of higher education that engage students in community service activities." It calls for giving students who complete an approved full-time national service job an "educational award having a value equal to the maximum amount of a Federal Pell Grant." AmeriCorps says this would increase the amount its members receive upon completion of service from $4,725 to $5,350, which they can use to pay for school or pay back student loans.

Forced Public Service

Some Internet postings claim the bill says the government must come up with plans for a “mandatory service requirement for all able young people,” but that phrase is nowhere to be found in either the House-passed bill or the Senate version.

The bill as introduced in the House, however, did call for examining whether this would be a good idea. It called for a congressional commission to "address and analyze" several topics, including "issues that deter volunteerism" and how they can be overcome, how expanding international public service might affect diplomacy and foreign relations, and "[w]hether 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." The commission would also investigate "[t]he need for a public service academy, a 4-year institution that offers a federally funded undergraduate education with a focus on training future public sector leaders."

All of that language is now gone. To be clear, the original bill didn't call for a mandatory public service program, but called for the exploration of whether one could be established. But the entire section on creating a "Congressional Commission on Civic Service" was stripped from the bill.

It is part of a separate piece of legislation, introduced on March 11 (two days after H.R. 1388 was introduced) by Democratic Rep. Jim McDermott. H.R. 1444 was referred to a House committee. No other action has been taken on the bill. McDermott introduced a similar bill in 2007 and it died, never making it out of a subcommittee.

Furthermore, Hatch, a Republican cosponsor of the Senate's national service bill, said on the floor of the Senate that nothing in the legislation called for mandatory service:

Hatch, March 23: Consistent with our All-Volunteer Army and volunteer opportunities and individuals' choice in communities, nothing in this legislation is mandatory. This bill simply provides more Americans more choices and opportunities to give back to their neighborhoods and their country all through the means which they freely choose.

The only mention of anything being mandatory in either of the bills passed by the House or Senate is in the definition for "youth engagement zone program." Such a program is eligible for funding under the bill, and it is defined in the House bill as one that provides school-based or community-based "service learning opportunities" in which "(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." That's not a call for making public service mandatory, but rather an explanation of one type of program that can get money under the bill. The Senate bill does not include the word "mandatory," saying instead that "service-learning is a part of the curriculum."

Thou Shalt Not Attend Church

Even though it would be an incredibly draconian law – and a clear violation of the First Amendment right to freedom of religion, upon which this country was founded – Internet postings still claim that under this bill "church attendance [is] forbidden."

The postings, which repeat commentary by the Jonas Clark Ministries, point to section 125, which lists "prohibited activities and ineligible organizations." The section says that those working in national service positions can't engage in partisan politics, union activities or religious instruction. And the language mirrors what AmeriCorps and Senior Corps tell their members about what they can't do while working for those programs.

Specifically, the bill says those in national service positions can't: attempt to "influence legislation"; organize "protests, petitions, boycotts or strikes"; promote "union organizing; engage in "partisan political activities, or other activities designed to influence the outcome of an election to any public office"; and engage 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." That's the House's language, and the wording in the Senate version is nearly identical. The Senate is perhaps more clear in saying "[a]n approved national service position under this subtitle may not be used for" all of these activities. In other words, public service activities can't include anything overtly religious or political. And this is nothing new.

The current AmeriCorps handbook tells volunteers much the same thing:

AmeriCorps handbook: There are certain activities, including lobbying, political, or advocacy activities, that you may not perform as an AmeriCorps member. Generally, you may not engage in any conduct that would associate the national service program or the Corporation for National and Community Service with any prohibited activity.

As an AmeriCorps member, you may not:

* engage in any effort to influence legislation, including state or local ballot initiatives or lobbying for your AmeriCorps program; for example, you may not organize a letter-writing campaign to Congress;
* engage in partisan political activities or other activities designed to influence the outcome of an election to any public office;
* organize or take part in political demonstrations or rallies;
* organize or participate in protests, petitions, boycotts, or strikes; ...
* engage in religious instruction; conduct worship services; provide instruction as part of a program that includes mandatory religious instruction or worship; construct or operate facilities devoted to religious instruction or worship; maintain facilities primarily or inherently devoted to religious instruction or worship; or engage in any form of religious proselytization; or
* provide a direct benefit to a for-profit entity, a labor union, a partisan political organization, or, in general, an organization engaged in the religious activities described in the preceding bullet.

Senior Corps' RSVP (Retired and Senior Volunteer Program) Operations Handbook includes similar language. It prohibits members from using their positions to engage in partisan political activities and stipulates that "volunteers and project staff funded by the Corporation [for National and Community Service] may not give religious instruction, conduct worship services, or engage in any form of proselytization as part of their duties." Organizations that offer religious instruction can continue to do so, but not with government funds. "If an organization conducts such activities, the activities must be offered separately, in time or location, from the programs or services funded under RSVP," the handbook says.

The national service legislation now goes to a Senate-House conference committee to agree upon the language of the final bill.

Update, March 31: The House has approved the Senate version of the bill, and it now will go to President Obama for his signature.

– Lori Robertson
Post Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:10 am
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
All times are GMT - 6 Hours.
The time now is Fri Nov 28, 2014 1:42 pm
  Display posts from previous:      


Powered by phpBB: © 2001 phpBB Group
Template created by The Fathom
Based on template of Nick Mahon