Posted by Sean Ryan on 04/08/09 12:26 PM Last updated 04/18/09 1:59 PM [Newer: Barney Frank discusses H.R. 1207] [Older: My letter to Senators Kerry and Kennedy, regarding S. 604]

A bill was introduced last month that would create an 8-member commission to study, among other things,

• "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."


• "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."

This bill would require that a final "report" be submitted to Congress no later than 2 years after the passage of the act. Do you think that the eight wise men just might find a "fair and reasonable" way for the government to confiscate more of our wealth, by taking from us a part of our very lives, instead of just a part of our money? For those of you who may be shrugging your shoulders and thinking, "What's the big deal?" - I only ask you to remember that you are the owner of your body, not the state. A mandatory period of "national service" is no different - in principle - than a military draft. If you were a draft protester in the 1970's, or if you are an anti-war activist now, don't be fooled by the government's supposedly good intentions in this particular case. Don't think that, once you give the government the power to treat its citizens merely as means - pawns to be directed according to centralized social engineering plans - you will be able to limit the government's power only to those ends that you think are justified or worthwhile. Principles matter, and this is why - occasionally - free people have taken the time to write them down.

Involuntary servitude is no less involuntary, just because the state is the master. If you know anyone who escaped to the U.S. from the former USSR, ask them their opinion of a system in which the state is the master of its subjects. As for me - I will never submit to a draft, and I will never be a domestic slave.

Originally posted on www.FreedomRide.us.

Posted 04/08/09 11:02 AM Justin DeWind Grand Rapids, MI

Yes, I have already emailed my representatives on this bill. I posted a related blog post awhile back, http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=14432.

Posted 04/08/09 11:12 AM MichaelBarry Sebring, FL

Is it not ironic that the return of involuntary servitude in the United States might come during the administration of the first President-of-color? The fact that he is quite a leftist is really the most important. Leftists see the principle function of government as imposing enforcement mechanisms and punishments upon the people. Do they not see the role of government as wielding the whip and flogging the helpless slaves?

Posted 04/08/09 12:37 PM Adam de Angeli Ann Arbor, MI

Added this tidbit the co-sponsors' Congressional dossiers on this website. Please message me or Andrew Ward if anyone else co-sponsors this.

Posted 04/08/09 12:38 PM smashysmashy dover, NH

The most dangerous thing about this act is that on paper to most (obviously not to us) this sounds like a pretty neat and well-intentioned idea. And maybe it really is well-intentioned, but the precedent this sets is extremely extremely dangerous. So this is how I am going to argue against it to the obamabots... Obama will not be president forever as much as you might like. What if another Bush is elected?? He could turn this well intentioned program into a very very dangerous program. So although the idea of everyone serving the country at least once sounds great, we are enabling the next Bush to steal your children and seriously abuse this act. This is why we should encourage servitude and not require it. As for this council "researching" this plan... come on! Are you serious? Obviously they are going to give it the green light after we give them however so much money to do their "research" (ehhhhemmm ehhhem, partying with tax payers dollars). It is clearly a ploy to waste a little bit more money to come out with a fluffy pro-servitude report to gain enough support from the dems to pass this. Scary times, scary times indeed.

Posted 04/08/09 5:42 PM KD Texas Houston, TX

Involuntary servitude, no matter how nicely it is dressed up to look appealing to the public, is still slavery. Many Americans already give time and effort to volunteering for organizations that are important to them. They do so when and where they choose and have the time to devote. This is America, it is not the government's place to mandate how we choose to 'give'. This is just one step closer to reinstating the draft.

Posted 04/08/09 7:41 PM Glenn Cumming, GA

There are people out there that think you owe something to your country and are in love with the Israeli model. These people frighten me. So, before you are born, the State has a claim on your body? Total bu11sh!t.

Posted 04/08/09 9:56 PM Two-if-by-Sea Wakefield, MA

unfortunately, it's not as easy as you'd think to convince people that this is a bad idea. i debated one obama supporter for quite sometime, saying that this is involuntary servitude and in violation of the 13th amendment, but he maintained that i was some sort of racist. this may have been a failure on my part to present my case adequately, but i think the situation is self explanatory- someone forcing you to do something is very likely wrong. i eventually got him to admit that the idea was in violation of the 13th amendment, but then, of course, i got the "well, you're just not giving obama a chance" line. the sad part is that, at least in the margins, this person seemed intelligent... i for one will never submit to involuntary servitude. i mean, if they pass such a bill, and i'm expected to paint fences or go to jail, then i'll probably just paint the fences or whatever i'm forced to do, but i will be extremely vocal in opposition, intentionally destroy supplies (by "accident" of course), and perhaps undo what i did in the day at night. in other words, even if they take my body, they won't take my spirit, and i'll make sure i'm more trouble than i'm worth!

Posted 04/08/09 11:19 PM JohnnyYuma61 Covington, TN

Tax Freedom Day is the Day The Tax Foundation calculates that Americans begin making money for themselves. This year, it falls on April 13th. I submit that if I am required to hand over a portion of the fruits of my labor to government (money), in the form of an income tax, which the government spends on who knows what, that I am already submitting to involuntary servitude. HR 1444 is just the potential for a law to make that transaction more direct; ie. no money changes hands. The Tax Foundation says that even though Tax Freedom Day will come earlier this year, "Americans will pay more in taxes than they will spend on food, clothing, and housing combined".

Posted 04/09/09 09:34 AM canska Waynesville, IL

I can't think of anyone who said it better than this, so I'll quote it directly: "I came here to say that I do not recognize anyone's right to one minute of my life. Nor to any part of my energy. Nor to any achievement of mine. No matter who makes the claim, how large their number or how great their need. I wished to come here and say that I am a man who does not exist for others. It had to be said. The world is perishing from an orgy of self-sacrificing. I wished to come here and say that the integrity of a man's creative work is of greater importance than any charitable endeavor. Those of you who do not understand this are the men who're destroying the world." -Ayn Rand, The Fountainhead Taxing my income, my property, everything I purchase, and everything I do is already beyond unacceptable. Each is an indirect theft of my time, energy, and life. To add insult, they additionally want to directly commandeer my time? No. As Rand also wrote, "we are approaching a world in which I cannot permit myself to live". I'll not ever surrender myself to such servitude.

Posted 04/09/09 11:26 AM Marchjm Yorktown, VA

I debated the legality of this bill with a couple of coworkers the other day. They saw nothing wrong with it! It turned my stomach to hear these two young American men in their twenties demonstrate utter ignorance of constitutional law. One of them was an actual Eagle Scout! Boy Scouts of the USSR? I'll simply show them the 13th amendment in my pocket constitution. the 13th is crystal clear. For the most part, young Americans have forgotten the sacrifices their immigrant ancestors suffered to escape Tyranny. Take any elementary history class people, it's all there. This should be a HUGE story in the impetant mainstream media. There should be an uproar from the ACLU. WHERE ARE THEY NOW? Go ahead and try to have my child drafted into servitude! See how far they get when we all say NO!

Posted 04/09/09 11:28 AM BruceLayne Lexington, KY

Rather than convening a panel for two years to study the social and economic impact of requiring involuntary servitude of American citizens, they should first study if this plan is constitutional. That should take no more than 15 minutes. That estimate assumes they have no prior understanding of our Constitution, which seems likely. They won't call this The 2011 Involuntary Servitude Act or the New Slavery Act of 2011. They'll come up with some goofy faux-patriotic acronym... something along the lines of The Working Together To Improve Individuals And Communities Act of 2011. The bill will be 950 pages long, it'll be introduced at 6:15 AM and Congress will vote for it without reading it because their attention span is barely sufficient to read the title. No doubt there will be plenty of loopholes, as always, so the families of politicians and their wealthy benefactors won't be adversely affected by this inconvenient legislation. After all, how can we have slavery without slave owners?

Posted 04/09/09 3:35 PM Ryan Sheets Louisville, KY

Oh the irony... 1) Obama campaigned on "equality" for minorities and the oppressed, something very counter to Democracy, the platform of his party. It should be painfully obvious that "majority rules" is designed for oppression of the minority. 2) The Democratic party was the anti-abolition party in the first place. 3) Obama idolizes Abraham Lincoln because he believes Lincoln ended slavery. Lincoln was perhaps the first neo-con. 4) Obama criticizes Bush for his power grabs, unnecessary wars and unconstitutional actions, something Lincoln was notorious for in his time. I suppose you're right: 600,000 people needed to die to end slavery, just as a million Iraqis needed to die to end terrorism. 5) Anyone who has read an honest book on Abraham Lincoln knows that he was, in actuality, very much like Bush, the president Obama criticized so heavily. 5) True to his word, Obama's presidency is very much like Lincoln's, and by extension, not-so-true to his word very much like Bush's. 6) Obama won his campaign largely because of his attacks on Bush. The American people wanted change, they got more of the same. 7) The first African-American president of the United States supports involuntary servitude. So there we have it, the first African-American president of the United States, a Democrat, supports a return of slavery. He said he wanted to mimic Abraham Lincoln, the Dubya of the 1860s, and he has. We have been hoodwinked.

Posted 04/09/09 7:41 PM stanzx Manhattan, KS

"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” —Samuel Adams

Posted 04/10/09 9:29 PM PEACE Jonesboro, AR

You know we used to have a choice to sign our draft cards or be fined and imprisoned. Nowadays it is automatic. No contract, just expectation. 'They' effectively cut off one of the only voices an 18 year old could choose to use against involuntary servitude. I don't know exactly when the change in policy took place, and I doubt it will take long for the changes in this policy to begin taking place.