Charles B. Rangel : Universal National Service Act, Being Investigated By An Ethics Committee,...

page: 1
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 02:22 PM
link   
If anyone has heard of Senator Charles B. Rangel, then I say bravo to you for knowing your politicians.

I started digging into this issue, and as well Charles Rangel, due to the many levels of how deep this goes. Due to his sitting on powerful seats within the House of Representatives, his co-authoring an act, which has continually been voted down, something which is meant to replace the former draft ability of our Government. And as well his being investigated by an Ethics Committee in the last 2 years.

This thread is not just about him, his actions, or the act being discussed elsewhere on ATS.

It is about the motive behind Rangel being investigated, if it is a point of leverage, to force him out of a powerful position, or perhaps to make American's forget about the act he's trying to pass, or even if he is being targeted to rewrite that act to pass easier.

If you do not know who Charles Rangel is there is a Wikipedia reference below for you.


Quote from : Wikipedia : Senator Charles B. Rangel

Charles Bernard "Charlie" Rangel is an American politician.

He has been a Democratic member of the United States House of Representatives since 1971, representing the Fifteenth Congressional District of New York, and is the most senior member of that state's congressional delegation.

He is a founding member of the Congressional Black Caucus.

In January 2007, Rangel became chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, the first African-American to do so.

Rangel was born in Harlem in New York City and had a somewhat troubled childhood.

He earned a Purple Heart and a Bronze Star for his service in the United States Army during the Korean War, where he led a group of soldiers out of a deadly Chinese Army encirclement during the Battle of Kunu-ri in 1950.

Rangel graduated from New York University in 1957 and St. John's University School of Law in 1960, then worked as a private lawyer, Assistant U.S. Attorney, and legal counsel during the early-mid 1960s.

He served two terms in the New York State Assembly from 1967 to 1970, then defeated longtime incumbent Congressman Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. in a primary challenge on his way to being elected to the House of Representatives.


Being a former service member, Rangell is a decorated veteran, something America can see as a hero.

But with the Universal National Service Act one has to wonder what this man is thinking.

Do we really need to force our citizens into service of the military and or civilian equivalent?

Is Rangel writing this act four different times, 2003, 2006, 2007, and now in 2010 something we should be concerned about, will being begin fleeing America into Canada?

Or will people willingly sign-up ahead of time of this being passed due to our economy?

What about people not wanting to serve who are saying it will happen over their dead bodies?

If anyone has heard of the Universal National Service Act, then I say bravo for knowing what your politicians are up to.


Quote from : Wikipedia : Universal National Service Act

The Universal National Service Act is the name of at least four bills proposed in the United States Congress (in 2003, 2006, 2007 and 2010).

The Universal National Service Act of 2007 is primarily sponsored by Congressman Charles Rangel of New York.

Advocates for National Service include Senator Chris Dodd, Professor and A More Perfect Constitution author Larry J. Sabato, and Time magazine Editor Rick Stengel.


What has me curious is that and author and magazine editor are participating as advocates.

You can read the bill, called H.R. 5741, over here.

Two years, mandatory service, sure sounds like forcing people to join up, but what is the punishment, if you do not join up, and serve your country because of this bill?

If anyone has heard about the Ethics Committee Rangel is being investigated by, then I say bravo for knowing something is amiss.


Quote from : Wikipedia : United States House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct

The Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, often known simply as the Ethics Committee, is one of the committees of the United States House of Representatives.


An ethics committee investigating someone in a position such as Rangel?

Can Charlie Rangel Avoid Ethics Charges?


Panel Hits Rangel With 13 Ethics Charges


Does this not strike people as an odd action to be investigating him if he's written a bill like H.R. 5741?

Are they trying to destroy the man in his power position, or perhaps bring his name to our minds?

Think about a motive, the means, and the opportunity these people have in mind.

If anyone has heard Rangel sits on the House Ways and Means Committee, then I say bravo for knowing where our money flows from, due to taxation, as well as other uses.


Quote from : Wikipedia : United States House Committee on Ways and Means

The Committee of Ways and Means is the chief tax-writing committee of the United States House of Representatives.

Members of the Ways and Means Committee cannot serve on any other House Committees, though they can apply for a waiver from their party's congressional leadership.

The Committee has jurisdiction over all taxation, tariffs and other revenue-raising measures, as well as a number of other programs including:

* Social Security
* Unemployment benefits
* Medicare
* Enforcement of child support laws
* Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, a federal welfare program
* Foster care and adoption programs

The U.S. Constitution requires that all bills regarding taxation must originate in the House of Representatives.

Since House procedure is that all bills regarding taxation must go through this committee, the committee is very influential, as is its Senate counterpart, the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance.

The Ways and Means Committee in the 111th Congress was chaired by Charlie Rangel, who has taken a leave of absence as chairman until House ethics violations have been resolved.

Pete Stark resigned as acting chairman, so Sander Levin holds that position until Rangel resumes the chair or the Congress ends.


So, with this particular committee, the U.S. House Committee on Ways and Means, being a hotseat, where our money is influenced from, is it not odd that all of this has happened?

Social Security is influenced from this committee.

Unemployment Benefits is influenced from this committee.

Medicare is influenced from this committee.

Enforcement of Child Support Laws is influenced from this committee.

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families is influenced from this committee.

Foster Care and Adoption is influenced from this committee.

Each and every one of those are somehow wrapped up into the bio-chip device through funding.

You know, Digital Angel, Verichip, and Destron Fearing where the Healthcare Reform touches base?

Something is definitely going on much deeper than we're lead to believe as far as Rangel is concerned.

Is this a smear campaign because of what he's been up to or just a diversion to shake our interest?

What happens after the Ethics Committee get done investigating will be very interesting.

Or is this just politics as usual in Washington D.C. and criminals investigating criminals?

What do you think of the man and what he is trying to do and how he's being accused?

With this being involving our taxes, and the Committee who makes those taxes, one has to wonder just what is going on, how it will affect us, and what's next.

[edit on 30-7-2010 by SpartanKingLeonidas]




posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 02:59 PM
link   
39 years... this man sat in office for almost four decades.
That in my opinion is one of the problems, and why I am a huge supporter of term limits for house and senate seats...

As far as the ethics charges emerging now, I really dont know what to say, in my opinion its another example of saving up the "dirt" to use as leverage. And well, 39 years is plenty of time for your enemies to gather wheelbarrows full...

I just hope "they" do not pull a fast one and "Rangel" The American people into a slickly worded draft that includes civilian duties.

As with most of your threads SKL im going to have to re-read the OP at least one more time to make sure it all soaked in.



Respectfully,

~meathead



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Mike Stivic
 


Yes, four decades in office, sure is a long time to sit in office.

I sure did notice his name, Rangel, and the American people being "wrangled".

So, if we're forced into two years of service, did it happen because of his bill/act?

Or in spite of it due to the ethics violations or accusations?

Noticing from the moment Obama took office he was pushing volunteerism, one has to wonder if he was pushing people to go that road, knowing this was another option.

One of the easiest ways for a President to get more service men and women, is robbing the piggy bank, the Treasury, through the Bailout Package.

Bush started that and Obama finished it.

One of the last signs a country is done, is the robbery of the Treasury.

Stealing all the funds, right before the complete destruction, through legal means.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 03:14 PM
link   
I hope that scumbag rots in jail, his estate expropriated, his children penniless and all his K street friends out a substantial percentage of their lucre.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by tetrahedron
I hope that scumbag rots in jail, his estate expropriated, his children penniless and all his K street friends out a substantial percentage of their lucre.


And your basing this hope of yours on what exactly?

Do you know for a fact he's done anything wrong?

Or is perhaps the accusation a mere point of leverage to force him to vote another way?

I agree with Mike Stivic, term limits should be mandatory, so we get fresh people.

But what if he did nothing whatsoever and this is all a charade to spin public opinion?

Remember, in politics, all it takes is an accusation of a crime, not an actual crime.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:57 PM
link   
I have not been following the investigation or the circumstances leading to it and for that, this thread was very helpful. Interesting times, interesting angles and lots to think about. Thanks for your effort in coming at the issues this potentially brings up, from a new angle.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 12:08 AM
link   
Look through the veil.

The Democrats are offering up a sacrificial lamb to appease the gods, a.k.a. the people of the USA. If they don't come down hard on one of the worse offenders, one of their own party as well, they will appear to be complacent. What better way for Democrats to appear to be for the people than to throw one of their own under the bus, so to speak? They can do this and profer themselves as proponents of the people. If they let it slide, negotiate agreements, or in any other way let him get away with what he's done, they will expose themselves as being co-conspirators.

Elections are coming and this is why you're seeing this; so other Democrats aren't negatively impacted by the actions of "this" Democrat.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 12:16 AM
link   
reply to post by abecedarian
 



The Democrats are offering up a sacrificial lamb to appease the gods, a.k.a. the people of the USA.


Right along my line of thinking. Pelosi had promise this would be the most honest Congress.
With elections coming up, Dems can't afford to have too many negative issues. It is bad enough jobs and economy is eating their lunch.

I predict a deal will be struck. Neither party wants race brought into the investigation. Now I wonder when they (ethics committee) will go after all the other Charlie Rangels in Congress.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 12:23 AM
link   

...
I predict a deal will be struck. Neither party wants race brought into the investigation. Now I wonder when they (ethics committee) will go after all the other Charlie Rangels in Congress.

They won't go after anyone unless they need to sacrifice one of their own to maintain power.

Odd you bring race into this... makes one wonder which "white" representative is going down to balance Rangel.

edit to add:
Rangel is sort of 'fighting' this, apparently, as he's resisted any negotiations for a settlement or such to reduce his guilt and has allowed the charges to commence. Wonder why? Is he in on the solution, like if he capitulates "X" he won't cross-contaminate evidence that could bring other Democrats down?

And I have to laugh every time I read "Democratic candidate" or "Democratic representative".... They are only "Democratic" when they adhere to the definition of the word. As far as I'm concerned, Pelosi is a "Democrat" and anything she does along her party's line is "Democrat" or "Democrat related", NOT "DEMOCRATIC".
People need to start separating the adjective from the noun in meaningful ways.

"Spade" is a suit in a deck of cards or a shovel, not a black person.
"Democratic" is by the people, not from the Democrat party.
Catch my drift?


[edit on 7/31/2010 by abecedarian]



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 09:32 AM
link   
reply to post by LadySkadi
 


When an investigation like this is happening, by an Ethics Committee, you can bet your bottom dollar, other people are hiding their actions.

That is how Washington D.C. works.

And usually the people on the Ethics Committee are completely unethical.

The majority of Washington D.C. has no morals whatsover.

They are amoral, without morals, they would sell their mother for a dollar.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by abecedarian
 


Agreed.

This is like Bernie Maddoff, Charles Rangel is just the one they are sacrificing.

Meanwhile, their were far worse Ponzi Schemes going on, by Maddoff's best friends.

This makes me wonder what Rangel's friends in Washington are up to.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 09:42 AM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 


The most honest Congress?

Pelosi is full of it completely.

There is no such thing when it comes to Washington D.C.

Democrats and Republicans have robbed us blind.

If a deal is struck it will still harm America.

The question is whether he is really guilty to begin with.

Or if these are trumped up charges just to dirty his name.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 09:46 AM
link   
Don't any of you remember a few years ago when this guy was in hot water?

He has even filed charges against himself!

www.propublica.org...


After the story broke, Rangel promptly moved the office [2] from his apartment and filed an ethics complaint against himself.


And then, he filed charges against himself, yet again, only a few days later!


This time, the Washington Post reported that Rangel had used congressional stationery [3] to solicit funds [4] for his personal foundation from companies with business before his committee. In response, Rangel filed another ethics complaint [5] ($) against himself. Rangel's foundation, the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service, garnered the nickname "Monument to Me" last year after he secured a $1.9 million earmark [6] for it.


Nobody needs to make this scumbag a sacrificial lamb, as he seems to be doing quite a good job on his own!



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Blanca Rose
 


I must have missed that story when it originally came out.

So, he's put himself up on ethics charges before?

Sure sounds like a drama queen trying to draw attention to himself.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 


Oh yeah, he's been caught before, and so is making a spectacle of himself, to draw attention away from his past issues.

Honestly, with all the crap he has pulled, I for the life of me can't figure out why the people of his state haven't had him recalled.

He is rotten to the core, and spits in the face of people who have elected him, as well as his cronies.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 10:11 AM
link   
S&F OP.

Thanks for all the compliments
, pretty much been keeping up on ol Charlie. If I remember correctly, the congress has been sitting on most of these charges for at least 16 months. Going by memory here so I may be off a little.

Delayed so that they could get all the bills through during this Congress? Or purposefully delayed til now for nefarious reasons.

Also, lo and behold we have this-California Rep. Waters may face fall ethics trial

A snippet-

AP


WASHINGTON — A second House Democrat, Rep. Maxine Waters of California, could face an ethics trial this fall, further complicating the election outlook for the party as it battles to retain its majority.

People familiar with the investigation, who were not authorized to be quoted about charges before they are made public, say the allegations could be announced next week. The House ethics committee declined Friday to make any public statement on the matter.


Washington Journal


WASHINGTON -- When Rep. Barney Frank was looking to aid a Boston-based lender last fall, the Massachusetts Democrat urged Maxine Waters, a colleague on the House Financial Services Committee, to "stay out of it," he says.

The reason: Ms. Waters, a longtime congresswoman from California, had close ties to the minority-owned institution, OneUnited Bank.


Well, to me it just looks to me like Washington as usual.

Anything more, heck, I do not know.

One thing I do know, If you did a poll of the American people and asked them, If you took one hundred people randomly from the public and one hundred people from Congress, who would have more criminals in the group?

I think you know the answer to the polling would be Congress.

Power corrupts but it also draws corruption to it.

Later SKL.



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 09:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Blanca Rose
 


If that is the case, not saying that it is, but if it is I wonder.

Is there a way to find out when, where, and by who those ethics charges originated from?

Or is it a blind process where no one finds out until a Congressional Hearing?

And if he's bringing charges against himself that sounds like intentionally creating drama.

For nothing else than tabloid news and cheap parlor tricks.

This sure makes me wonder about him even more.

If he's intentionally bringing heat upon himself for these issues what is he really hiding?



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 09:41 AM
link   
reply to post by endisnighe
 


100 American citizens or 100 American Congress members?

Well, I would say 100 Congress, every single time.

More criminals within Congress definitely.

That just means a few things which are disheartening.

1) Law Enforcement is not doing their jobs correctly.

a) Being paid off.

b) Looking the other way.

c) Blackmailing those members of Congress for more funding.

2) Congress believes, falsely, they are above the laws they write.

a) If we're to be held accountable so should Congress.

b) They have far too much power and it needs to be parsed down.

c) Term limits needs to be instated.

3) Congress has their re-election machine to rely upon to get re-elected.

a) Out vote counts for nothing whatsoever.

b) We're being sold a lie completely and a charade is being taught during our education. Meaning high-stakes fraud is being perpetuated against America. Fraud is illegal and has jail sentences that go with each level.

c) Apathy and ignorance are reigning in America instead of intelligence and wisdom.

Washington D.C. as usual is sure looking like a overflowing cess pool.

Nothing new there now is there endisnighe?

It is time for a mandatory change like Bell, California is doing.

Outrage Over Bell City Pay Scandal Spreading Throughout California


Holding their politicians accountable for once.

I sure hope what happened in Bell, California spreads quickly across America.

Like a forest fire that cleanses the dead underbrush.

And wipes out all the overpaid politicians by the people throwing them out.

The question is whether this is the Liberty Bell being rung.

Or the death knell of America notifying us our country is dead.

Rangel is no different if he's drawing attention to himself.

What else is he hiding and what agenda does he have for the attention?

For the Universal National Service Act and to get people to resist?

If this passes I see a lot of American's refusing completely.

What repercussions will come of a refusal to serve?

Fines?

Jail time?

Revocation of citizenship?

Is this how Congress intends to give amnesty to Illegal Aliens?

Other than joining the Military already this might be an incentive.

What benefits are they going to offer other than a guaranteed paycheck?

To some people a paycheck is not enough to sign-up for service.

And this being pushed to being mandatory sure will not help.

[edit on 2-8-2010 by SpartanKingLeonidas]



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 02:32 PM
link   
On Universal Service:

I honestly don't think it's going to happen because it's a bad idea that I'd hope most people wouldn't even entertain. It's been on the docket before and it's never come to pass, but I'll make the case against it anyway.

According to the census, there were 26.1 million Americans between the age of 18-23 in 2010, so even by simple math we can estimate that there are conservatively 5 million 18 year olds each year. If we require 2 years of service that makes for about 10 million new federal (or state, or a combination of the two depending on how it's set up) employees to add to the payroll.

Taking just those people into account, meaning not including uniforms, training staff, training materials, facilities, facilities maintenance, and general consumption of power etc, we are shelling out a lot more money.

Just the payroll alone, at $25,000/year salary (which is fairly conservative) we are adding another 250 billion to the cost of government per year.

On Charlie Rangel:

I'll let the system work on this guy. I'm not terribly concerned about it since I have serious doubts that most in Congress are really much better. To me this seems like a petty offering to the masses.

Peace
KJ



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 05:27 AM
link   
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 



Here, let me post one moreof his MANY shining moments.

“It is the same group we faced in the South with those white crackers and the dogs and the police. They didn’t care about how they looked. It was just fierce indifference to human life that caused America to say enough is enough. ‘I don’t want to see it and I am not a part of it.’ What the hell! If you have to bomb little kids and send dogs out against human beings, give me a break.”

Link to article on Zimbio
edit on 8/3/1313 by Martin75 because: jumped the gun





new topics
top topics
 
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join