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

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Mandatory youth service HR1388 being voted on today
BTW: this title is mis-leading. Recommendations for mandatory service are part of what is being voted on, not actually requiring/implementing it now.

I assume to get implemented they'll have to later vote on it (or Exec Order/signing statement later?)

Fern
 

dainthomas

Lifer
Dec 7, 2004
13,855
2,124
126
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
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.?
Would this be a Department? Would it's purpose be to protect the Homeland? Would it do this by providing Security?

God, it would be horrible if anything like that were ever created! :Q
 

GeezerMan

Platinum Member
Jan 28, 2005
2,096
3
81
Originally posted by: jonks
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.
Sure, I read it. I disagree. A "civilian national security force" funny name for group intended to help others. Volunteering is now a national security issue. I do see a connection between Rahm Emanuel calling for a domestic force and what Obama wants.
 

OrByte

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
9,299
137
106
Originally posted by: Fern

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


(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.
I think we are getting closer to understanding the language as is written.

The commission will address whether "mandatory service" COULD be developed in a manner blah blah blah.....which isn't to say it WILL be developed.

So basically, youth service programs are going to be studied. Including the possibility of mandatory programs. End of story.

I am really amazed at how some people went off the deep end with this youth bill. I mean seriously, jail time? fines? failing school? WTF is the matter with some of you people.

I would say lay off the kool-aid but that doesn't begin to describe the ammount of fear and propaganda some of you subscribe to. How do you all function in real life!?

Edit: OP I'd fix your thread title, hopefully now that the adults were able to inform you correctly that which your link failed to provide to you, you have a better understanding of this bill.

There is no mandatory youth service requirement. As it stands right now, your Thread title is a lie.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,214
126
If the possibility of mandatory service is mentioned it's not because they just needed more filler.

Tell me, if the last administration has presided when a bill came before a Republican Congress studying "Whether military action against Iran could be implemented that would make American interests stronger" you'd say the same? After all they wouldn't have said they were going to do it. You'd be concerned and rightly so.
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
18
81
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
Sure, I read it. I disagree. A "civilian national security force" funny name for group intended to help others. Volunteering is now a national security issue. I do see a connection between Rahm Emanuel calling for a domestic force and what Obama wants.
Oh, I see. I did a quick google. The far right is aflutter connecting Rahm's statement with Obama's and reaching the conclusion that they want to form a Brownshirt army.

I guess context doesn't really matter if you want to see something that isn't there. It was one sentence in the middle of a section talking about expanding Americorp, Peace Corp, Freedom Corp, and Foreign Service. The context:

Obama:
[As] president I will expand AmeriCorps to 250,000 slots [from 75,000] and make that increased service a vehicle to meet national goals, like providing health care and education, saving our planet and restoring our standing in the world, so that citizens see their effort connected to a common purpose.

People of all ages, stations and skills will be asked to serve. Because when it comes to the challenges we face, the American people are not the problem ? they are the answer. So we are going to send more college graduates to teach and mentor our young people. We'll call on Americans to join an energy corps, to conduct renewable energy and environmental clean-up projects in their neighborhoods all across the country.

We will enlist our veterans to find jobs and support for other vets, and to be there for our military families. And we're going to grow our Foreign Service, open consulates that have been shuttered and double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011 to renew our diplomacy. We cannot continue to rely only 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. We need to use technology to connect people to service. We'll expand USA Freedom Corps to create online networks where American can browse opportunities to volunteer. You'll be able to search by category, time commitment and skill sets. You'll be able to rate service opportunities, build service networks, and create your own service pages to track your hours and activities.

This will empower more Americans to craft their own service agenda and make their own change from the bottom up.
If in reading that, all you see is a pledge to introduce an SS type brigade, I'd test the tap water in your town.

Here's some wiki for you also:

In his 2006 book, co-authored with Bruce Reed, The Plan: Big Ideas for America,[45] Emanuel advocated a three-month compulsory universal service program for Americans between the ages of 18 and 25.[46] An expanded version of this idea was later proposed by U.S. Presidential candidate Barack Obama (who was later to choose Emanuel as his White House Chief of Staff), during his 2008 campaign, in a speech on July 2, 2008 at the University of Colorado, in which Obama proposed a "civilian national security force" (this term being used in the spoken version of his speech, not in the original written version), which included expanded voluntary national service programs in many areas, such as infrastructure rebuilding, service to the elderly, and environmental cleanup. For some of these services, tax credits and direct pay, primarily for college tuition, was proposed. Obama's original proposal was for participation by all ages, but with required participation by all middle school and high school students for 50 hours of community service a year. That proposed requirement was later modified to being "a goal".[47] Obama's entire service program proposal quickly became controversial, largely for being mistaken as a call for a national paramilitary force, though the proposal's only reference to military service was to volunteer participation in regular U.S. Armed Forces, as one activity that would qualify for inclusion under the program's umbrella.
I didn't realize MI5 only did 3 months of training.
 

OrByte

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
9,299
137
106
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
If the possibility of mandatory service is mentioned it's not because they just needed more filler.

Tell me, if the last administration has presided when a bill came before a Republican Congress studying "Whether military action against Iran could be implemented that would make American interests stronger" you'd say the same? After all they wouldn't have said they were going to do it. You'd be concerned and rightly so.
I doubt such a bill to "study" such military action would ever be drafted. However I am willing to wager that bills that create "commissions" for the purposes of studying the feasibility of initiatives are created all the time. Which is essentially what is happening here.

These bills get vetted through congress. These "commissions" are setup to determine the feasibility of such programs. This is your government in action people.

Plenty of people like you and I can contact our congress people to bitch and moan about such initiatives, and commissions are always influenced by such lobbying. Key word Lobby. :shocked:

IMHO this is like watching a bill die on the house floor. I doubt these specific "mandatory" type initiatives will ever be green lighted...but that won't stop people from trying (just look at Weapons ban initiatives) and it won't stop people from shooting them down.

With that said I agree that a certain level of concern is warranted by those that don't wish to see such programs implemented. But there is certainly no sign of such concern here by the OP or others in this thread (Nor at "Endoftimes" blog) People are showing some real sad levels of ignorance and paranoia over this.

I mean get real !! jailtime!?!? LOL!!!
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
72,591
23,697
136
Originally posted by: Fern

"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
No, it doesn't make me look foolish at all. I'm not trying to shoehorn anything in, I merely mentioned it as a possible vehicle for requiring service because it is a policy that is already in place in numerous school districts nationwide.

What I'm saying is that this bill does nothing more than create a commission to study something. If you think such a thing is 'ominous', then you should go read up on the other things Congress has created commissions on in the past. You'd probably be sitting in a fallout bunker.

This thread is a freakout thread based on... nothing. It's not based on a law, not based on a bill congress passed, not based on a bill that congress is even considering, not even based on a recommendation, but on outrage generated by them creating a commission to possibly issue a recommendation.

Absolutely ridiculous.
 

Zenmervolt

Elite member
Oct 22, 2000
24,510
11
81
Originally posted by: eskimospy
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.
Non sequitur much?

I've given no indication that I support any sort of "revolt", simply stated that I disagree with a service requirement for HS graduation.

Furthermore, as such requirements are (currently) non-universal (indeed, this is the first time I have heard of any public school requiring community service as a prerequisite for graduation) there remains the option to simply avoid living in school districts that impose this restriction or to choose to send my (as yet purely theoretical) children to private schools or even to homeschool and thereby avoid the requirement in a nonviolent manner.

Still, your perverse assumption that such a disagreement might lead me to revolt does offer an interesting insight about how you perceive those who disagree with you.

ZV
 

GeezerMan

Platinum Member
Jan 28, 2005
2,096
3
81
Obama at Wesleyan Commencement Address, May 2008

Transcript of speech



"It?s because you have an obligation to yourself. Because our individual salvation depends on collective salvation. Because thinking only about yourself, fulfilling your immediate wants and needs, betrays a poverty of ambition. Because it?s only when you hitch your wagon to something larger than yourself that you realize your true potential and discover the role you?ll play in writing the next great chapter in America?s story."
 
Feb 6, 2007
16,432
1
81
Originally posted by: shinerburke
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 work for a private K-12. Students in the high school are required to do 120 hours of service learning, with a minimum of 40 hours being done at the school and a minimum of 40 hours done in the community at large. The activities that qualify as service learning include being a teacher's assistant in lower grades, working at the student store, serving as an aide in the library, volunteering in nursing homes, homeless shelters, hospitals, working as an outdoor school counselor, etc. There are lots of volunteer activities that aren't "picking up trash along the highway."

And the thing is, the matriculation rate of these students to college is 99%, which is way above the national average. Maybe volunteering in one's community is actually a good thing to learn at that age; the students here certainly seem to be incredibly successful. Learning how to be a productive member of society requires more than knowing the quadratic formula.
 

Zenmervolt

Elite member
Oct 22, 2000
24,510
11
81
Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
I think everyone should be required to serve their country - no exceptions.
What constitutes "serving their country" and who decides?

As I pointed out earlier, volunteering in a church-sponsored soup kitchen is clearly service, but what happens when someone complains about the school supporting religion by counting that service towards the required amount?

What if a family owns several houses on an inner-city block, maintains them all to exceptional standards, rents them to low income people at prices well below the market value, provides educational and medical assistance to the families living in those houses, and helps those families to establish themselves? (This is an actual example, my sister's boyfriend's family is well off, but rather than spend the money on themselves, they have chosen to help others; they get calls in the middle of the night for emergencies, they are respected and admired in their community and by their renters; overall they spend huge amounts of time and resources helping their community.) Since that's not an "official" organization, it's likely that it wouldn't count in any system that sets a requirement though.

This is the problem with requiring service. It effectively punishes people who serve in "unapproved" ways. Besides, everyone who pays taxes is already serving their country. We are, on average, effectively donating over 3 months worth of our income to the country. If we didn't have taxes, I could have an extra 13-14 weeks of vacation each year and still have the same net income.

ZV
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
18
81
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
Obama at Wesleyan Commencement Address, May 2008

Transcript of speech



"It?s because you have an obligation to yourself. Because our individual salvation depends on collective salvation. Because thinking only about yourself, fulfilling your immediate wants and needs, betrays a poverty of ambition. Because it?s only when you hitch your wagon to something larger than yourself that you realize your true potential and discover the role you?ll play in writing the next great chapter in America?s story."
Again, 1) only the far right sees that as ominous instead of inspiring, 2) it's a freaking commencement speech, not some official proposition or proposed legislation calling for the paramilitarization of the civilian populace.

I think we've reached the end of rational debate on this topic. Call me when Obama disbands congress. Laters.
 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
141
116
Godwin is alive and well in this thread.
 

GeezerMan

Platinum Member
Jan 28, 2005
2,096
3
81
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
Obama at Wesleyan Commencement Address, May 2008

Transcript of speech



"It?s because you have an obligation to yourself. Because our individual salvation depends on collective salvation. Because thinking only about yourself, fulfilling your immediate wants and needs, betrays a poverty of ambition. Because it?s only when you hitch your wagon to something larger than yourself that you realize your true potential and discover the role you?ll play in writing the next great chapter in America?s story."
Again, 1) only the far right sees that as ominous instead of inspiring, 2) it's a freaking commencement speech, not some official proposition or proposed legislation calling for the paramilitarization of the civilian populace.

I think we've reached the end of rational debate on this topic. Call me when Obama disbands congress. Laters.
So a Peace Corps type of volunteer group is to be called a "civilian national security force " and is to be as well funded and just as powerful as the military. That's bllions of dollars. Yep, we agree to disagree.
 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
141
116
People think this is slavery, oh the stupidity.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
72,591
23,697
136
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: eskimospy

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

I've given no indication that I support any sort of "revolt", simply stated that I disagree with a service requirement for HS graduation.

Furthermore, as such requirements are (currently) non-universal (indeed, this is the first time I have heard of any public school requiring community service as a prerequisite for graduation) there remains the option to simply avoid living in school districts that impose this restriction or to choose to send my (as yet purely theoretical) children to private schools or even to homeschool and thereby avoid the requirement in a nonviolent manner.

Still, your perverse assumption that such a disagreement might lead me to revolt does offer an interesting insight about how you perceive those who disagree with you.

ZV
Dude, it was an exaggeration for effect. I don't think you're going to start a revolution based on high school graduation requirements.
 

yowolabi

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2001
4,183
2
81
FIRST..... they proposed a bill that might not pass, which updates 20 year old laws, that as one of hundreds of updates would authorize a bipartisan commission, who will study 12 things, one of which is whether a fair and feasible mandatory program would work, who will then submit a report to congress within 20 months that has no force of law (and which may conclude that mandatory service is unfeasible), at which time the report could be trashed or simply ignored by someone who wants to do the opposite of it's recommendations.


THEN..... Obama started putting Jews into ovens


Seems reasonable to me.
 

yowolabi

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2001
4,183
2
81
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Anyone else see the irony in someone named McCarthy proposing this? :)
Only the people without reading or comprehension skills.
 

OrByte

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
9,299
137
106
I guess the OP posted and ran...


sort of like....."a drive by" :laugh:


And no edit to the topic. This thread should be locked for lies.

 

daniel49

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2005
4,814
0
71
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
I guess this is in addition to the civilian national security force Obama spoke of?
Damn, I gotta find my brown shirt and get ready.


Link
Yes, that statement is as of yet unexplained and appears ludicrous.
Unless suggested by "the One"
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY