Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act Waiting for Obama's Signature

The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act has just passed Congress and is now ready for President Obama to sign the measure into law. The House passed the Serve America Act with a vote of 275-149. The bill amends the National and Community Service Act of 1990 and will create two new service-learning programs.

The bill passed the Senate on March 26 by a vote of 79 to 19 after debating the House of Representatives' version, the "Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act," or GIVE Act. The House-passed version of the bill included an amendment sponsored by Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) that would have far-reaching, negative consequences for nonprofit advocacy. For example, it would have restricted National Service fund recipients from using private funds for lobbying; endorsing or supporting events that endorse or oppose legislation; or engaging in selected nonpartisan voter engagement activities. OMB Watch issued an action alert and encouraged others to tell their Senators to oppose any effort to add similar language in the Senate version.

Senator DeMint (R-SC) offered an amendment very similar to the Foxx amendment. Any organization that engages in political or legislative advocacy would have been disqualified from participating in national service programs. Fortunately, this amendment was not taken up by the Senate. The measure passed after senators adopted a substitute amendment that incorporated the text of the Senate version (S. 277) without any harmful language. The Senate also renamed the bill the Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act. Just from OMB Watch's alert, more than 5,800 e-mails were sent to senators and the White House.

The Serve America Act will provide incentives for students and senior citizens to participate in volunteer community service and includes the Nonprofit Capacity Building Initiative, designed to expand organizational development assistance to small and midsize nonprofits. For more information on the Serve America Act, visit Independent Sector or the National Council of Nonprofits.

(Amanda Adams 03/31/09)

Comments

by Anonymous (not verified) on 04/12/09

Heaven forbid we prevent the

Heaven forbid we prevent the "nonpartisan" ACORN group from getting their hands on even more tax paper dollars. How will Mickey Mouse be able to vote if they can't afford to pay some felon to register him.

by Amanda Adams on 04/14/09

First, ACORN has never been

First, ACORN has never been convicted of a federal crime and any group that is convicted of a federal crime would become ineligble to receive funding under this bill. Second, any participating group can not use National Service funding to engage in activities such as voter registration drives, but may do so with their private funds. Third, the proposed amendments that we opposed would have penalized other organizations that may have been in the same building as ACORN, even if they were completely separate organizations. For example, if a group that provide services to the homeless is located in the same building, they would then be prohibited from getting AmeriCorps volunteers.

by Nonprofit Prof (not verified) on 04/07/09

I disagree with this prior

I disagree with this prior post on both counts. OMB Watch is not partisan, but neither is it neutral on the issues it supports. For some time, one of OMB Watch's central causes has been to promote the advocacy rights of nonprofits and to remind the public and legislators that these rights are constitutionally protected. Seems Foxx and Demint need to read the First Amendment again, since neither amendment would likely have survived a judicial test. OMB Watch was right to point this out and also to note the chilling effect these amendments would have on nonprofit free speech rights. If "Anonymous" objects to OMB Watch's argument that the amendments would have had "far-reaching, negative consequences for nonprofit advocacy," that statement strikes me as factually accurate rather than biased. In fact, Foxx and Demint might even agree since that was their intent after all.

by Anonymous (not verified) on 04/03/09

Transparency with a twist?

Transparency with a twist? Your website esposes a neutral transparency. But the first time I come to this site, I see you picked sides in the story above....Just be honest about who you are then.