• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Recommendations on Mandatory youth service HR1388 being voted on today

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Socio

Golden Member
May 19, 2002
1,726
2
81
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Socio
Originally posted by: Thump553
Quick rule of thumb: a website entitled "End Times Roundtable" is highly suspect. Here's link to a rational summary of this proposed bill-straight from the government:

What the end-of-earthers think is a slavery program-to be imposed by a Black President, no less

This bill is not about imposing slavery. It is the program Obama promised during his campaign to reward students for service to America by paying part of their college costs.
Then it should be voluntary not involuntary, the fact that it is ?mandatory? makes it a form of slavery and violates the constitution.
No it doesn't. The draft is constitutional, and you have absolutely no idea what this 'mandatory service requirement' is in relation to. It could be 'mandatory' to get your high school diploma. It could be 'mandatory' to qualify for government benefits. I SINCERELY DOUBT (and I'm being as nice as possible here) that it's going to be some sort of 'mandatory' thing where you are subject to imprisonment or court sanction for not participating.
The very fact they are going to make it mandatory would mean there will be some form harsh reprisal or deterrent for refusing, i.e. jail, huge fines, denied continuing education, and or just be drug out of your house and forced to attend.
 

shiner

Lifer
Jul 18, 2000
17,116
0
0
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Originally posted by: shinerburke
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
Originally posted by: eskimospy

No it doesn't. The draft is constitutional, and you have absolutely no idea what this 'mandatory service requirement' is in relation to. It could be 'mandatory' to get your high school diploma. It could be 'mandatory' to qualify for government benefits. I SINCERELY DOUBT (and I'm being as nice as possible here) that it's going to be some sort of 'mandatory' thing where you are subject to imprisonment or court sanction for not participating.

No you just becoime ostrsized and ridiculed for not following the path laid out by Dear Leader.
Can we call it the Obama Youth Act?
Huh? You realize that school districts all over the country already have such requirements for graduation, etc? Are you people really this paranoid and crazy in real life? If so, how do you function in society?

Never heard of a school district doing that. I would be against such a thing were my kids required to do it. They are in school to learn math, science, grammar, history, etc, etc, etc....not pick up trash along the highway or whatever. If there is a "club" within the school that wants to do volunteer service that is fine, key word being volunteer. It should be an opt in program, not an opt out.
I for one welcome our new government overlords.
Where's my gubment cheese??
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
73,352
25,078
136
Originally posted by: Socio
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Socio
Originally posted by: Thump553
Quick rule of thumb: a website entitled "End Times Roundtable" is highly suspect. Here's link to a rational summary of this proposed bill-straight from the government:

What the end-of-earthers think is a slavery program-to be imposed by a Black President, no less

This bill is not about imposing slavery. It is the program Obama promised during his campaign to reward students for service to America by paying part of their college costs.
Then it should be voluntary not involuntary, the fact that it is ?mandatory? makes it a form of slavery and violates the constitution.
No it doesn't. The draft is constitutional, and you have absolutely no idea what this 'mandatory service requirement' is in relation to. It could be 'mandatory' to get your high school diploma. It could be 'mandatory' to qualify for government benefits. I SINCERELY DOUBT (and I'm being as nice as possible here) that it's going to be some sort of 'mandatory' thing where you are subject to imprisonment or court sanction for not participating.
The very fact they are going to make it mandatory would mean there will be some form harsh reprisal or deterrent for refusing, i.e. jail, huge fines, denied continuing education, and or just be drug out of your house and forced to attend.
What are you basing this on? Oh yeah, nothing.
 

miketheidiot

Lifer
Sep 3, 2004
11,062
1
0
dumb idea i agree

edit: you're still an idiot

preemptive fake edit: yes i know my name is miketheidiot. old troll is old
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,214
126
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Socio
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Socio
Originally posted by: Thump553
Quick rule of thumb: a website entitled "End Times Roundtable" is highly suspect. Here's link to a rational summary of this proposed bill-straight from the government:

What the end-of-earthers think is a slavery program-to be imposed by a Black President, no less

This bill is not about imposing slavery. It is the program Obama promised during his campaign to reward students for service to America by paying part of their college costs.
Then it should be voluntary not involuntary, the fact that it is ?mandatory? makes it a form of slavery and violates the constitution.
No it doesn't. The draft is constitutional, and you have absolutely no idea what this 'mandatory service requirement' is in relation to. It could be 'mandatory' to get your high school diploma. It could be 'mandatory' to qualify for government benefits. I SINCERELY DOUBT (and I'm being as nice as possible here) that it's going to be some sort of 'mandatory' thing where you are subject to imprisonment or court sanction for not participating.
The very fact they are going to make it mandatory would mean there will be some form harsh reprisal or deterrent for refusing, i.e. jail, huge fines, denied continuing education, and or just be drug out of your house and forced to attend.
What are you basing this on? Oh yeah, nothing.
He's being his usual dramatic self, but the government never mandates without some punishment.
 

ayabe

Diamond Member
Aug 10, 2005
7,449
0
0
I had to do 150 hours of community service to get my IB diploma, but not for my HS.

Not sure how I feel about this, it could just drive more kids away from graduating.
 

AreaCode707

Lifer
Sep 21, 2001
18,425
45
91
Originally posted by: Socio


Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime where of the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
And yet you can get arrested, below a certain age, for not showing up to high school. Truancy laws. Hmmm.

<--- homeschooler that interacted with police on occasion for not being physically in school during the weekday
 

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
-snip-
Hmmmm, search for the word "mandatory" not found. Socio! You F'ing moron!
Yes it is. Here is text copied from the bill as reported in the Library of Congress/Thomas (no use to provide link, you have to search for H.R. 1388 and drill down to it. The link everyone keeps providing 'expires')

SEC. 6104. DUTIES.

(a) General Purpose- The purpose of the Commission is to gather and analyze information in order to make recommendations to Congress to--

(1) improve the ability of individuals in the United States to serve others and, by doing so, to enhance our Nation and the global community;

(2) train leaders in public service organizations to better utilize individuals committed to national service and volunteerism as they manage human and fiscal resources;

(3) identify and offer solutions to the barriers that make it difficult for some individuals in the United States to volunteer or perform national service; and

(4) build on the foundation of service and volunteer opportunities that are currently available.

(b) Specific Topics- In carrying out its general purpose under subsection (a), the Commission shall address and analyze the following specific topics:

(1) The level of understanding about the current Federal, State, and local volunteer programs and opportunities for service among individuals in the United States.

(2) The issues that deter volunteerism and national service, particularly among young people, and how the identified issues can be overcome.

(3) Whether there is an appropriate role for Federal, State, and local governments in overcoming the issues that deter volunteerism and national service and, if appropriate, how to expand the relationships and partnerships between different levels of government in promoting volunteerism and national service.

(4) Whether existing databases are effective in matching community needs to would-be volunteers and service providers.

(5) The effect on the Nation, on those who serve, and on the families of those who serve, if all individuals in the United States were expected to perform national service or were required to perform a certain amount of national service.

(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.
So, it appears that the commission will be charged with examing whether a mandatory service requirement will be developed. If so, then how it would be implemented.

==========

Originally posted by: eskimospy
-snip-
No it doesn't. The draft is constitutional, and you have absolutely no idea what this 'mandatory service requirement' is in relation to. It could be 'mandatory' to get your high school diploma. It could be 'mandatory' to qualify for government benefits. I SINCERELY DOUBT (and I'm being as nice as possible here) that it's going to be some sort of 'mandatory' thing where you are subject to imprisonment or court sanction for not participating.

Yes, in fact, we do.

Read subsection (b) above under section 6104, it refers to subsection (a) and those functins enumerated. The mandatory service requirment would be for those functions listed under subsection (a).

So, it has nothing to do with high school diplomas etc as you state and it's purpose is defined.

Mandatory service will not automaticall be implemented if this bill passes, as I read it. However, it will pursued and one must assume it is intended to be implemented if the commission can figure out how to do so. Of course, there is always the chance public opinion will prevent it.

Fern
 

GeezerMan

Platinum Member
Jan 28, 2005
2,096
3
81
Link

Obama July 2008 :
"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."


Speech Link

 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
18
81
Pubilc or private school attendance (or verified home schooling) is mandatory. Phear teh lurning.
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
18
81
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
Link

Obama July 2008 :
"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."


Speech Link
Welcome to the party but it looks like you've been drinking already. Here's your ticket. http://www.factcheck.org/askfa...civilian_national.html

Here's Fox News on your security force:

"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that is just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded," Obama, who worked as a community organizer in Chicago early in his career, said during a Colorado Springs rally.

At the time, Obama was discussing expanding the USA Freedom Corps -- created by President George W. Bush in 2002 -- Peace Corps and AmeriCorps, as well as beefing up the cadre of foreign service officers abroad and programs in which veterans help veterans back home.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
73,352
25,078
136
Originally posted by: Fern

Yes, in fact, we do.

Read subsection (b) above under section 6104, it refers to subsection (a) and those functins enumerated. The mandatory service requirment would be for those functions listed under subsection (a).

So, it has nothing to do with high school diplomas etc as you state and it's purpose is defined.

Mandatory service will not automaticall be implemented if this bill passes, as I read it. However, it will pursued and one must assume it is intended to be implemented if the commission can figure out how to do so. Of course, there is always the chance public opinion will prevent it.

Fern
No, you still don't know.

Those clauses are INCREDIBLY general, and could be applied to almost anything, and it most certainly could end up being applied in such a way having to do with high school graduation or whatever.

So... huh?
 

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,628
181
106
Originally posted by: Socio
Mandatory youth service!!HR1388 going to Congress!

HR 1388, will hit the House floor on Tuesday.It is called the Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act (The Give Act.) The House is scheduled to Rule this week. Sponsored by Democrat Representative Carolyn McCarthy (NY), Education and Labor Committee. The objective is to reauthorize and reform the national service laws.Democrat Rep. McCarthy is sponsoring the bill with 25 co-sponsors, ALL Democrats, including Charlie Rangel. Need I say more.
Quote:
From the Misc. 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.
Seems to me that this is a direct violation of the Thirteenth Amendment;

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime where of the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

That being said Obama should be ashamed of himself for trying to enslave American peoples which is basically what this is.
Hot Damn, finally a way for Socio to do some payback.:thumbsup:
 

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Fern

Yes, in fact, we do.

Read subsection (b) above under section 6104, it refers to subsection (a) and those functins enumerated. The mandatory service requirment would be for those functions listed under subsection (a).
-snip-
No, you still don't know.

Those clauses are INCREDIBLY general, and could be applied to almost anything, and it most certainly could end up being applied in such a way having to do with high school graduation or whatever.

So... huh?
Yes, we do.

Why do ignore the obvious?

As clearly written, items enumerated under subsection (b) are intended to support the objectives listed under subsection (a)

So no, it can't be "applied to almost anything" or "end up being applied in such a way having to do with high school graduation or whatever". Nothing to do with those is listed under subsection (a).

If you continue to insist the purpose of mandatory duty is "INCREDIBLY" vague and general that is only more omminous IMO.

Fern
 

GeezerMan

Platinum Member
Jan 28, 2005
2,096
3
81
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
Link

Obama July 2008 :
"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."


Speech Link
Welcome to the party but it looks like you've been drinking already. Here's your ticket. http://www.factcheck.org/askfa...civilian_national.html

Here's Fox News on your security force:

"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that is just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded," Obama, who worked as a community organizer in Chicago early in his career, said during a Colorado Springs rally.

At the time, Obama was discussing expanding the USA Freedom Corps -- created by President George W. Bush in 2002 -- Peace Corps and AmeriCorps, as well as beefing up the cadre of foreign service officers abroad and programs in which veterans help veterans back home.
In Rahm Emanuel's book, The Plan: Big Ideas for America, published in 2006, he sketches out his ideas on how to ?fight against the spread of evil and totalitarianism.? Emanuel suggests ?we must protect our homeland and civil liberties by creating a new domestic counter-terrorism force like Britain?s MI5.?
 

Zenmervolt

Elite member
Oct 22, 2000
24,510
11
81
Originally posted by: eskimospy
It could be 'mandatory' to get your high school diploma. It could be 'mandatory' to qualify for government benefits. I SINCERELY DOUBT (and I'm being as nice as possible here) that it's going to be some sort of 'mandatory' thing where you are subject to imprisonment or court sanction for not participating.
If you cannot obtain a HS diploma without acquiescing to the service requirement then the punishment is indeed severe as a lack of a HS diploma will severely restrict an individual's ability to gain acceptance into college. This is simply not acceptable.

As a condition for receiving government aid money or educational loans, certainly. But as a requirement for a HS diploma, not at all.

Further confusing the issue though is whether there will be exemptions for people who volunteer in other areas. Let's say someone volunteers several hours a week at a soup kitchen or a nursing home. Should the government be allowed to say that such service doesn't count towards the "mandatory" service in government-approved areas? I don't think that's acceptable.

Granted, this is all speculation at this point and I have no issues with an exploratory committee (other than the fact that a committee is perhaps the least efficient entity ever created by mankind). I just think that there are a lot of potential issues with the infringement of freedom here that need to be kept in mind.

ZV
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
73,352
25,078
136
Originally posted by: Fern

Yes, we do.

Why do ignore the obvious?

As clearly written, items enumerated under subsection (b) are intended to support the objectives listed under subsection (a)

So no, it can't be "applied to almost anything" or "end up being applied in such a way having to do with high school graduation or whatever". Nothing to do with those is listed under subsection (a).

If you continue to insist the purpose of mandatory duty is "INCREDIBLY" vague and general that is only more omminous IMO.

Fern
What the hell are you talking about? The subsection A is talking about the duties of a commission set up to issue recommendations! Of course you want it to be general so that the body has the leeway to make recommendations however they see fit. How else are you supposed to get a broad range of ideas?!? I would LOVE to hear how not specifically delineating the recommendations you want from a committee set up to examine an issue is 'ominous'. Either you didn't read this well enough, or you're turning into one of the crazies on here too.

"High school graduation or whatever" isn't listed in section A because that would be a very specific means by which to accomplish one of those outlined goals, and if they're telling the commission what to recommend, then what's the purpose of making the commission to begin with?

Jesus christ, people.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
73,352
25,078
136
Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski

So, by your logic and thinking, since minors have less rights we can force them to do whatever we want them to do.

By stating that don't participate in this mandated "required" programs will receive less help from the government spits in the face of equal rights for all. Shit, lets start creating our new social economic class now and beat Barry to the punch and show him that us lazy Americans can snap to and actually do something to make his wife proud to be an American.
No, I'm just saying that Atreus21's comment about the draft doesn't really support the point I think he was trying to make. Your attempt at a straw man is noted though.

The rest of your post doesn't really deserve a response.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
2
0
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
Just make it so without participation, no government services/aid shall be provided.


Similar to having to register for the draft.
Not bad.

Also, any kid who get a juvie record automatically forced to enlist. Let Sergent don't-fvck-with-me teach them a lesson when they are repeatedly woken up at 5:00 am to go for runs in the rain straighten them out.
Quick rule of thumb: a website entitled "End Times Roundtable"
LOL
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
73,352
25,078
136
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: eskimospy
It could be 'mandatory' to get your high school diploma. It could be 'mandatory' to qualify for government benefits. I SINCERELY DOUBT (and I'm being as nice as possible here) that it's going to be some sort of 'mandatory' thing where you are subject to imprisonment or court sanction for not participating.
If you cannot obtain a HS diploma without acquiescing to the service requirement then the punishment is indeed severe as a lack of a HS diploma will severely restrict an individual's ability to gain acceptance into college. This is simply not acceptable.

As a condition for receiving government aid money or educational loans, certainly. But as a requirement for a HS diploma, not at all.

Further confusing the issue though is whether there will be exemptions for people who volunteer in other areas. Let's say someone volunteers several hours a week at a soup kitchen or a nursing home. Should the government be allowed to say that such service doesn't count towards the "mandatory" service in government-approved areas? I don't think that's acceptable.

Granted, this is all speculation at this point and I have no issues with an exploratory committee (other than the fact that a committee is perhaps the least efficient entity ever created by mankind). I just think that there are a lot of potential issues with the infringement of freedom here that need to be kept in mind.

ZV
Well you better go start the revolt against school districts all over the country, as quite a few already require this.
 

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
Thanks for a bit of sanity, Fern. So ...

A Commission will analyze a mandatory service requirement and how its implementation might improve the country - then report to Congress. Check.

I think everyone should be required to serve their country - no exceptions.
 

frostedflakes

Diamond Member
Mar 1, 2005
7,925
1
0
Oh look, it's a Socio thread.

Fern hit the nail on the head. No mandatory youth service is being voted on today, although one of the purposes of the program is to determine whether this would be practical and beneficial to the country. To be honest, though, I doubt any mandatory service bill would ever make it through Congress.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Fern

Yes, we do.

Why do ignore the obvious?

As clearly written, items enumerated under subsection (b) are intended to support the objectives listed under subsection (a)

So no, it can't be "applied to almost anything" or "end up being applied in such a way having to do with high school graduation or whatever". Nothing to do with those is listed under subsection (a).

If you continue to insist the purpose of mandatory duty is "INCREDIBLY" vague and general that is only more omminous IMO.

Fern
What the hell are you talking about? The subsection A is talking about the duties of a commission set up to issue recommendations! Of course you want it to be general so that the body has the leeway to make recommendations however they see fit. How else are you supposed to get a broad range of ideas?!? I would LOVE to hear how not specifically delineating the recommendations you want from a committee set up to examine an issue is 'ominous'. Either you didn't read this well enough, or you're turning into one of the crazies on here too.

"High school graduation or whatever" isn't listed in section A because that would be a very specific means by which to accomplish one of those outlined goals, and if they're telling the commission what to recommend, then what's the purpose of making the commission to begin with?

Jesus christ, people.
"Jesus Christ, people"

Exactly, yet not how you intend.

FFS, it says "mandatory SERVICE. (Not education.)

You can try to 'shoehorn' high school diplomas into that and the enumerated objectives under section (a) all you want but it just makes somebody looks foolish. ;)

Inspite of repeated language by Obama and others indictaing mandatory service quoted here and elswhere, present and past, you refuse to acknoledge the obvious and insult those who do. Are you so opposed to madatory service and desperately hoping Obama agrees with you that you can't accept this reality?

Face, it's being considered and the concept is in this bill.

Fern
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
18
81
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
Link

Obama July 2008 :
"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."


Speech Link
Welcome to the party but it looks like you've been drinking already. Here's your ticket. http://www.factcheck.org/askfa...civilian_national.html

Here's Fox News on your security force:

"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that is just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded," Obama, who worked as a community organizer in Chicago early in his career, said during a Colorado Springs rally.

At the time, Obama was discussing expanding the USA Freedom Corps -- created by President George W. Bush in 2002 -- Peace Corps and AmeriCorps, as well as beefing up the cadre of foreign service officers abroad and programs in which veterans help veterans back home.
In Rahm Emanuel's book, The Plan: Big Ideas for America, published in 2006, he sketches out his ideas on how to ?fight against the spread of evil and totalitarianism.? Emanuel suggests ?we must protect our homeland and civil liberties by creating a new domestic counter-terrorism force like Britain?s MI5.?
And...? I'm not seeing the connection here and I don't think you read the factcheck link I provided. Even Fox understood what Obama was proposing. Expanding the Peace Core != MI5. I also fail to see the link between something Rahm Emanuel published in 2006 about a counter-terrorism agency and a line from a speech Obama made in 2008 about a civilian based network designed to boost volunteerism.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,214
126
Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
Thanks for a bit of sanity, Fern. So ...

A Commission will analyze a mandatory service requirement and how its implementation might improve the country - then report to Congress. Check.

I think everyone should be required to serve their country - no exceptions.
I think the government should serve it's people, not the other way around. It's funny that people who detest being led around by Bush should embrace taking away years of their lives by the same govt.

 

ASK THE COMMUNITY