HR 1388 – The Beginning of the Brown Shirt Brigades?

Many of you may remember my initial rant against O’prompter and Emanuel’s proposed Mandatory Civilian National Defense Force. I wrote about it way back in November, here (you can click it if you want, it should open a new window, not leave this one). I kind of left the subject alone for a while because it didn’t seem like there was anything going on with it. But I got a call last week from Revolution who told me to go and check out HR 1388. So I did, and what do I find? It isn’t being left alone at all! On March 18, the House of Representatives passed by a vote of 321-105 (a bi-partisan vote) HR1388– The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act (The GIVE Act). And somehow this isn’t making big news the way it should. 

So let’s talk a bit about the GIVE Act shall we? What exactly does this legislation say and do? I will admit that I am getting a lot of information from a lot of different sources for this article. I will attempt to cite them all at the end so that I am being fair to others who have done research as well. Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) has sponsored the bill. I have tried to read through the 600+ pages of this act to attempt to determine what its purpose is. It is as difficult to decipher as any bill that I have ever read, which I think is on purpose so that people won’t understand it.

Let me start with something easy. The bill includes several changes to the wording in US Code (which makes up all of our laws) in order to make the language a little more nicer sounding.  Because of this, you’re not really sure of what it’s doing unless you flip back and forth between the text of H.R. 1388 and the various USC sections, which are equally as dense. They do things like changing camps to campuses, some examples:

(C) in paragraph (3)–
(i) by striking ‘superintendent’ and inserting ‘campus director’; and
(ii) by striking ‘camp’ and inserting ‘campus’; and

‘(1) UNITS TO BE ASSIGNED TO CAMPUSES- ’;
(ii) by striking ‘in camps’ and inserting ‘in campuses’;
(iii) by striking ‘camp’ and inserting ‘campus’; and
(iv) by striking ‘in the camps’ and inserting ‘in the campuses’;

‘(3) ELIGIBLE SITE FOR CAMPUS- ’;
(ii) by striking ‘A camp may be located’ and inserting ‘A campus must be cost-effective and may, upon the completion of a feasibility study, be located’;

‘(e) Distribution of Units and Campuses- ’;
(B) by striking ‘camps are distributed’ and inserting ‘campuses are cost-effective and are distributed’; and
(C) by striking ‘rural areas’ and all that follows through the period at the end and inserting ‘rural areas such that each Corps unit in a region can be easily deployed for disaster and emergency response to such region.’; (I read this as they want their ‘Camps’ distributed in ‘rural’ country…away from population centers)

SEC. 1508. AUTHORIZED BENEFITS FOR CORPS MEMBERS.

Section 158 (42 U.S.C. 12618) is amended–

(1) in subsection (a) by inserting ‘National’ before ‘Civilian Community Corps’; and
(2) in subsection (c)–
(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1)–
(i) by inserting ‘National’ before ‘Civilian Community Corps’; and
(ii) by inserting before the colon the following: ‘, as the Director determines appropriate’;
(B) in paragraph (6), by striking ‘Clothing’ and inserting ‘Uniforms’; and
(C) in paragraph (7), by striking ‘Recreational services and supplies’ and inserting ‘Supplies’. (I read this section as the elimination of local or state volunteerism being eligible for benefits. Only National, as in determined by the new Socialist Party, counts)

So the language changes to United States Code appear to try to make it sound less like the Hitler Youth and more like a fun trip to school. But the language changing clothing to uniforms makes me a little nervous. And the fact that the federal government wants to control it all, taking “volunteerism” away from state and local levels is even more troubling.

Now one of the big parts of this deal that I am not going to cover is that the participation in the volunteer programs make the volunteers eligible for government grants, including education assistance. The list of benefits for participation is fairly extensive, too extensive to list here. So let’s take a look at some of the eligibility parts of what HR 1388 does for us. Who is NOT eligible to “volunteer” and thus receive government loot? 

SEC. 125. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES AND INELIGIBLE ORGANIZATIONS.

(a) Prohibited Activities- A participant in an approved national service position under this subtitle may not engage in the following activities:
(1) Attempting to influence legislation.
(2) Organizing or engaging in protests, petitions, boycotts, or strikes.
(3) Assisting, promoting, or deterring union organizing.
(4) Impairing existing contracts for services or collective bargaining agreements.
(5) Engaging in partisan political activities, or other activities designed to influence the outcome of an election to any public office.
(6) Participating in, or endorsing, events or activities that are likely to include advocacy for or against political parties, political platforms, political candidates, proposed legislation, or elected officials.
(7) Engaging 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.

So anyone volunteering cannot be involved in politics, unions, or religion? Let us keep in mind while it sounds like they can’t be involved in partisan political activities, they will be doing work assigned by the government, which is inherently partisan. So in effect, the people volunteering are doing the will of the government and are not permitted to be free to make their own choices and get involved in what they believe in on their own time. This is indoctrination, pure and simple. 

And are these people really volunteers or are they “volunteers”? Eligible groups must demonstrate that the organization in question meet this requirement as well:

(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.

So let me get this straight: In order for organizations to be eligible to receive the funds from the federal government, they must make “service-learning” a mandatory part of the curriculum?

Let us remember two things. First: As I reported in the November post, O’prompter has mentioned a “mandatory volunteer force” in the past, even talking about it on his websites until it was removed after his political advisors scrubbed its mention. Second: In 1924, Germany started the Greater German Youth Movement. Sounds innocent enough, right? In 1926, it was renamed the Hitler Youth League of German Worker Youth, which was shortened to just Hitler Youth. By 1930, it had over 25,000 members and its ranks swelled as former boy scouts were directed into the Hitler Youth where they were given… uniforms. Uniforms like those of the German Stürmabteilung (SA), a.k.a. the “Brownshirts”. As the Hitler Youth matured, many went into the SA, and the SA’s successor, the SS. 

Looking at recent events, we see Obama’s political “footsoldiers” — ACORN — doing many things to help Obama and his allies gain and retain power: voter fraud, bullying banks, “helping” in the upcoming census, and most recently, chartering busses to deposit angry protestors on the doorstep of AIG executives. To intimidate them. Unsurprisingly, Obama’s first judicial appointment, David Hamilton, who is being nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, is a former ACORN fundraiser.

Of course, anyone who supports this Bill is going to tell you “It’s just about supporting volunteer organizations that already exist!” and will heatedly insist that there’s “Nothing Mandatory” about any of it. And in the strictest sense, that is a true statement. But there most assuredly are requirements attached to being a recipient of ‘Grants’:

‘(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:

Again, nothing “Mandatory” in the strictest possible sense – as long as you (or your respective education departments or school districts) don’t take any Grant-money. But before I let this one die away, I direct you to the bottom of the bill. The most troubling parts of this are, as such things tend to be, way at the bottom:

TITLE VI–CONGRESSIONAL COMMISSION ON CIVIC SERVICE (just certain parts copied here, as they are the important parts)

SEC. 6103. ESTABLISHMENT.
There is established in the legislative branch a commission to be known as the ‘Congressional Commission on Civic Service’ (in this title referred to as the ‘Commission’).
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–
(b) Specific Topics- In carrying out its general purpose under subsection (a), the Commission shall address and analyze the following specific topics:

(NOW PAY SPECIAL ATTENTION TO THE BOLDED SECTIONS!)

(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.

(7) The 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. 

(8) The means to develop awareness of national service and volunteer opportunities at a young age by creating, expanding, and promoting service options for elementary and secondary school students, through service learning or other means, and by raising awareness of existing incentives.

(9) The effectiveness of establishing a training program on college campuses to recruit and educate college students for national service.

(11) The constraints that service providers, nonprofit organizations, and State and local agencies face in utilizing federally funded volunteer programs, and how these constraints can be overcome. (I imagine that ‘Mandatory’ would ‘overcome’)

(12) Whether current Federal volunteer programs are suited to address the special skills and needs of senior volunteers, and if not, how these programs can be improved such that the Federal Government can effectively promote service among the ‘baby boomer’ generation.

So, the current bill does not have the language to make this service mandatory, at least not yet. But there is a commission being formed as to how best to make it so. If the intention is to create a mandatory civilian force, the groundwork is being laid. According to the Commission’s “Specific Topics”, mandatory seems as though it is exactly the intention.

Now, how many of you even knew about HR 1388? It seems like an awful big thing to be flying under the radar, doesn’t it? It has already been passed by the House and is being fast-tracked in the Senate. And the bipartisan vote in the House doesn’t bode well for it losing there. But that bipartisan vote sure does speak to the fact that both parties seem to be OK with controlling us one way or another. So now that we are all aware, what do we do to stop it? Because I don’t want my son, who is a teenager now, serving in Obama’s Brown Shirt Brigade.

Writing this was fun, at least inserting the pictures was fun. I love the Michelle quote on the Obama youth picture. I do want to be clear here: You all know me as a pretty fair minded guy (at least I think you do). It may not be fair to compare this to the Hitler youth. I will grant that there is at least a chance that the President is pushing this legislation as a way to foster a sense of pride in our country again, which is severely lacking these days. I don’t have a problem with a true volunteer service. After all if this were that then it isn’t much different than joining the military. But the idea of a mandatory service, especially one that serves the socialist agenda of the Pelosi’s and Reid’s of today, is truly frightening. Consider this article food for thought. I am open to discussion on the subject as always. Is this a good thing or a bad thing. Am I overreacting?