AnAmericanCitizen
2009-03-20 05:00:01 UTC
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/18/house-readies-passage-volunteerism-critics-pricey-forced-service/
"It's allowing taxpayer funding of the left-wing organizations," said Larry Hart,
director of government relations for the American Conservative Union.
House Passes Volunteerism Bill Critics Call Pricey, Forced Service
The legislation will expand the1993 AmeriCorps program to match the renewed interest
in national service since President Obama's election, which backers say is crucial in
tough economic times.
By Kelley Beaucar Vlahos
FOXNews.com Wednesday, March 18, 2009
The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act, known as the GIVE Act --
sponsored by Reps. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y, and George Miller, D-Calif. -- was
approved by a 321-105 vote and now goes to the Senate.
The legislation, slated to cost $6 billion over five years, would create 175,000 "new
service opportunities" under AmeriCorps, bringing the number of participants in the
national volunteer program to 250,000. It would also create additional "corps" to
expand the reach of volunteerism into new sectors, including a Clean Energy Corps,
Education Corps, Healthy Futures Corps and Veterans Service Corps, and it expands the
National Civilian Community Corps to focus on additional areas like disaster relief
and energy conservation.
It is the first time the AmeriCorps program, which was created by President Clinton
in 1993, will be reauthorized, and supporters say it will have additional funding to
match the renewed interest in national service since President Obama's election and
the acute need for volunteerism and charity in tough economic times.
"National and community service can help make Americans a part of the solution to get
our country through this economic crisis. I hope the House and Senate will join us in
moving as quickly as possible to help President Obama sign this critical bill into
law," Miller, chairman of the education committee, said after the bill was passed.
But the bill's opponents -- and there are only a few in Congress -- say it could cram
ideology down the throats of young "volunteers," many of whom could be forced into
service since the bill creates a "Congressional Commission on Civic Service."
The bipartisan commission will be tasked with exploring a number of topics, including
"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."
"We contribute our time and money under no government coercion on a scale the rest of
the world doesn't emulate and probably can't imagine," said Luke Sheahan,
contributing editor for the Family Security Foundation. "The idea that government
should order its people to perform acts of charity is contrary to the idea of charity
and it removes the responsibility for charity from the people to the government,
destroying private initiative."
House committee staff insist the GIVE Act will not change the voluntary nature of
service.
"Its ridiculous to suggest that our bill includes any effort to make service a
mandatory requirement. All of the opportunities our bill provides to Americans are
voluntary. Americans are proud of their service and volunteering and their interest
in it is only growing, especially in the face of this crisis. Our legislation
recognizes that more Americans than ever want to serve and give back and provides
them with more opportunities to be able to do so," Miller spokeswoman Rachel Racusen
said in an e-mail to FOXNews.com.
Others say they are concerned that the increased funding will be used to promote one
ideology over another.
"It's allowing taxpayer funding of the left-wing organizations," said Larry Hart,
director of government relations for the American Conservative Union.
"I think this is a problem that is rife throughout the federal government. When you
dramatically expand the program, then you dramatically expand the ability for these
left-wing advocacy organizations to get more funding. I don't see a lot of attention
being paid to that, even from those who are critical. That's where the focus should
be. Republicans tend to say its not that they oppose the program, they just want to
spend less money. It's the program that's bad."
South Carolina Rep. Joe Wilson was one of three Republicans to oppose the legislation
in committee. Wilson questioned the utility of the cash-strapped federal government
making such huge investments in what he says should be community-inspired projects
and programs.
"Volunteerism is part of the American spirit of generosity, and we all stand in
support of those who will share their time," said Wilson, who was voted against the
bill with Minnesota Rep. John Kline and California Rep. Tom McClintock.
"However, while our economy and our government is in financial trouble, it is not the
best use of taxpayer dollars to spend the level of money on new and existing programs
included in this bill."
Aides to Miller say they are awaiting estimates from the Congressional Budget Office
on how much the GIVE Act would ultimately cost. In addition to all of the funding
that goes to organizations in the forms of grants and administrative costs,
AmeriCorps volunteers typically receive stipends and college scholarships when they
complete one of the several available programs.
For example, a participant in the National Civilian Community Corps, which is a
10-month residential commitment, now receives $4,000 in living expenses and a $4,475
in money toward school. That conceivably would increase under the new legislation.
But regardless of the budget estimate, the financial benefits outweigh the cost,
Racusen said.
"The millions of Americans who volunteered in 2007 generated benefits worth $158
billion," Racusen said. "A cost-benefit analysis of AmeriCorps, for example, shows
that every dollar invested in the programs yields almost $4 in direct, measurable
benefits. Investing in service helps low-income students achieve in school, prepares
future workers for green jobs, provides assistance to veterans returning from war,
and rebuilds homes and communities after disasters."
Many of the provisions in the GIVE Act can be found in Obama's 2010 fiscal year
budget blueprint issued in February. The administration proposes $1.3 billion for the
Corporation for National and Community Service, which administers AmeriCorps. CNCS
received an estimated $260 million in fiscal 2009.
But some critics on the right suggest that the president's push for national service
goes too far, and the recent congressional steps toward expanding the federal role in
volunteerism and "civilian service" smacks of a larger agenda. They point to a
campaign speech the president made last July in which he suggested national security
could be entrusted to a civilian 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.
"This will empower more Americans to craft their own service agenda and make their
own change from the bottom up," Obama said in the speech.
"Senator Obama aims to tap into the already active volunteerism of millions of
Americans and recruit them to become cogs in a gigantic government machine grinding
out his social re-engineering agenda," Lee Cary of the conservative American Thinker
wrote at the time about Obama's remarks.
"(His words) were about turning America into one, giant, community organizer's
sandbox at enormous cost to taxpayers," Cary wrote.
Supporters say critics are a minority who prefer to agitate than assist.
"Resistance to expanded public service programs can be expected from the
ideologically sclerotic, those who occupy the negative ground between government as
the problem and government as our enemy," former Democratic Colorado Sen. Gary Hart
wrote in a recent op-ed on the Huffington Post Web site.
The Senate is mulling over a similar piece of legislation, the "Serve America Act,"
sponsored by Sens. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Ted Kennedy, D-Mass. It was given a
special endorsement by the president in his address before Congress on Feb. 24
"It's allowing taxpayer funding of the left-wing organizations," said Larry Hart,
director of government relations for the American Conservative Union.
House Passes Volunteerism Bill Critics Call Pricey, Forced Service
The legislation will expand the1993 AmeriCorps program to match the renewed interest
in national service since President Obama's election, which backers say is crucial in
tough economic times.
By Kelley Beaucar Vlahos
FOXNews.com Wednesday, March 18, 2009
The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act, known as the GIVE Act --
sponsored by Reps. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y, and George Miller, D-Calif. -- was
approved by a 321-105 vote and now goes to the Senate.
The legislation, slated to cost $6 billion over five years, would create 175,000 "new
service opportunities" under AmeriCorps, bringing the number of participants in the
national volunteer program to 250,000. It would also create additional "corps" to
expand the reach of volunteerism into new sectors, including a Clean Energy Corps,
Education Corps, Healthy Futures Corps and Veterans Service Corps, and it expands the
National Civilian Community Corps to focus on additional areas like disaster relief
and energy conservation.
It is the first time the AmeriCorps program, which was created by President Clinton
in 1993, will be reauthorized, and supporters say it will have additional funding to
match the renewed interest in national service since President Obama's election and
the acute need for volunteerism and charity in tough economic times.
"National and community service can help make Americans a part of the solution to get
our country through this economic crisis. I hope the House and Senate will join us in
moving as quickly as possible to help President Obama sign this critical bill into
law," Miller, chairman of the education committee, said after the bill was passed.
But the bill's opponents -- and there are only a few in Congress -- say it could cram
ideology down the throats of young "volunteers," many of whom could be forced into
service since the bill creates a "Congressional Commission on Civic Service."
The bipartisan commission will be tasked with exploring a number of topics, including
"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."
"We contribute our time and money under no government coercion on a scale the rest of
the world doesn't emulate and probably can't imagine," said Luke Sheahan,
contributing editor for the Family Security Foundation. "The idea that government
should order its people to perform acts of charity is contrary to the idea of charity
and it removes the responsibility for charity from the people to the government,
destroying private initiative."
House committee staff insist the GIVE Act will not change the voluntary nature of
service.
"Its ridiculous to suggest that our bill includes any effort to make service a
mandatory requirement. All of the opportunities our bill provides to Americans are
voluntary. Americans are proud of their service and volunteering and their interest
in it is only growing, especially in the face of this crisis. Our legislation
recognizes that more Americans than ever want to serve and give back and provides
them with more opportunities to be able to do so," Miller spokeswoman Rachel Racusen
said in an e-mail to FOXNews.com.
Others say they are concerned that the increased funding will be used to promote one
ideology over another.
"It's allowing taxpayer funding of the left-wing organizations," said Larry Hart,
director of government relations for the American Conservative Union.
"I think this is a problem that is rife throughout the federal government. When you
dramatically expand the program, then you dramatically expand the ability for these
left-wing advocacy organizations to get more funding. I don't see a lot of attention
being paid to that, even from those who are critical. That's where the focus should
be. Republicans tend to say its not that they oppose the program, they just want to
spend less money. It's the program that's bad."
South Carolina Rep. Joe Wilson was one of three Republicans to oppose the legislation
in committee. Wilson questioned the utility of the cash-strapped federal government
making such huge investments in what he says should be community-inspired projects
and programs.
"Volunteerism is part of the American spirit of generosity, and we all stand in
support of those who will share their time," said Wilson, who was voted against the
bill with Minnesota Rep. John Kline and California Rep. Tom McClintock.
"However, while our economy and our government is in financial trouble, it is not the
best use of taxpayer dollars to spend the level of money on new and existing programs
included in this bill."
Aides to Miller say they are awaiting estimates from the Congressional Budget Office
on how much the GIVE Act would ultimately cost. In addition to all of the funding
that goes to organizations in the forms of grants and administrative costs,
AmeriCorps volunteers typically receive stipends and college scholarships when they
complete one of the several available programs.
For example, a participant in the National Civilian Community Corps, which is a
10-month residential commitment, now receives $4,000 in living expenses and a $4,475
in money toward school. That conceivably would increase under the new legislation.
But regardless of the budget estimate, the financial benefits outweigh the cost,
Racusen said.
"The millions of Americans who volunteered in 2007 generated benefits worth $158
billion," Racusen said. "A cost-benefit analysis of AmeriCorps, for example, shows
that every dollar invested in the programs yields almost $4 in direct, measurable
benefits. Investing in service helps low-income students achieve in school, prepares
future workers for green jobs, provides assistance to veterans returning from war,
and rebuilds homes and communities after disasters."
Many of the provisions in the GIVE Act can be found in Obama's 2010 fiscal year
budget blueprint issued in February. The administration proposes $1.3 billion for the
Corporation for National and Community Service, which administers AmeriCorps. CNCS
received an estimated $260 million in fiscal 2009.
But some critics on the right suggest that the president's push for national service
goes too far, and the recent congressional steps toward expanding the federal role in
volunteerism and "civilian service" smacks of a larger agenda. They point to a
campaign speech the president made last July in which he suggested national security
could be entrusted to a civilian 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.
"This will empower more Americans to craft their own service agenda and make their
own change from the bottom up," Obama said in the speech.
"Senator Obama aims to tap into the already active volunteerism of millions of
Americans and recruit them to become cogs in a gigantic government machine grinding
out his social re-engineering agenda," Lee Cary of the conservative American Thinker
wrote at the time about Obama's remarks.
"(His words) were about turning America into one, giant, community organizer's
sandbox at enormous cost to taxpayers," Cary wrote.
Supporters say critics are a minority who prefer to agitate than assist.
"Resistance to expanded public service programs can be expected from the
ideologically sclerotic, those who occupy the negative ground between government as
the problem and government as our enemy," former Democratic Colorado Sen. Gary Hart
wrote in a recent op-ed on the Huffington Post Web site.
The Senate is mulling over a similar piece of legislation, the "Serve America Act,"
sponsored by Sens. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Ted Kennedy, D-Mass. It was given a
special endorsement by the president in his address before Congress on Feb. 24