Discussion of Legislation - Domestic Activities

From WikiCODOPN

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Legislation on Domestic Activities - with Comments

SEC. 102. RESPONSIBILITIES AND POWERS.

(a) In General- The Secretary shall--

(1) work proactively and interactively with each branch of the Federal Government on all policy matters relating to conditions of peace;

Does this include anti-poverty programming – poverty has often been linked with an environment of violence – will the Department of Peace engage in projects such as shelters, food banks, etc. as well? --Jul 19:06, 17 Oct 2006 (EST)


Although the DoPN may not choose to use the term “anti-poverty”, but rather focus on “pro-opportunity,” I would think the DoPN would be very engaged in these programs. These programs may look different from today’s programs. (I say this only because to make the DoPN a reality, it has to also satisfy the value system of well meaning Conservatives who will want to be sure that intervention programs include adequate opportunity for people to be trained and educated so they can become self sufficient – we might say the DoPN will continue to ask “what is the root cause of poverty, lack of adequate shelter, hunger, etc.” – in some cases, the root cause may be traced back to the lack of educational opportunity combined with lack of access to health care, etc. So from my perspective, the value the DoPN can add to our society is the holistic viewpoint. The “Conditions of Peace” are extremely complex and intervention programs will involve a wide range of practitioners. Hopefully the DoPN will ask “Why are people in poverty? Unemployed or under employed? Unable to gain access to mental and physical health care?
Let's say that the Colorado Model of the DoPN will indeed address these issues because these issues are often “symptoms” of some form of structural violence that the DoPN will strive to reduce if not eliminate. MiltH 21:40, 18 October 2006 (CDT)
I should have known that given we are pro-peace not anti-war, I could have launched into my personal issue of being "done with poor" and working from a position of building wealth. This however is a discussion that we can take up in another place and time. However - it is critical that we clearly identify the link between violence, poverty, lack of access to health care (including substance abuse) and the need to address these issues wholistically to fully achieve the vision of America we all share. --Jul 19:06, 25 January 2007 (EST)

(3) call on the intellectual and spiritual wealth of the people of the United States and seek participation in its administration and in its development of policy from private, public, and nongovernmental organizations; and

How will “communities of faith” from all faith traditions be engaged in the process? (Would like to see the phrase “communities of the diversity of faiths” be included in the language)--Jul 19:06, 17 Oct 2006 (EST)

The DoPN will be charged with the responsibility of upholding the Constitution of the United States (as are all other Departments). I suspect that the DoPN will serve as a gentle reminder of the First Amendment, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof….. “ Without this “Right” we cannot continue our spiritual growth and reach our full potential – anything less would be a form of “violence.” MiltH 20:40, 18 October 2006 (MDT)


Suggest that your phrase be inserted for future versions (and for use by the Colorado Model) MiltH 20:40, 18 October 2006 (MDT)

(4) monitor and analyze causative principles of conflict and make policy recommendations for developing and maintaining peaceful conduct.

Who will monitor – what will be analyzed – i.e. crime, economic injustice, elder abuse, etc.? Where will the information come from?--Jul 19:06, 17 Oct 2006 (EST)

There is an adage “You can’t change something that you don’t measure (or monitor)”
I might propose that we use our technology to “nonviolently” identify and gather information about people in distress – people who are being violated – prevented from being who they can be – marginalized – ostracized – constrained by others – etc. Often this information is a matter of public record, but the DoPN could also collect (and protect) information that is “privileged” for this analysis. Working models already exist in the health care industry. The DoPN would be focused on eliminating subtle forms of violence (identifying lack of opportunities, etc. and providing these opportunities) – whereas existing organizations and agencies that addressing the immediate pain and suffering would continue in their efforts. MiltH 20:40, 18 October 2006 (MDT)

I have been thinking about this one a bit - I think the first step would be that in its role of coordinator all the existing studies could be centralized and cross referenced to create one comprehensive picture. That would mean we wouldn't have to "ask again" --Jul 19:06, 25 January 2007 (EST)

How will information be used – distributed?--Jul 19:06, 17 Oct 2006 (EST)

Suspect we will have to develop this “procedure/policy” using models from the other sectors that deal with sensitive information. MiltH 20:40, 18 October 2006 (MDT)

Because we are dealing with violence we have both criminal and health related issues to watch out for - i'm glad I'm not the one who has to create the security system for this one...--Jul 19:06, 25 January 2007 (EST)

How will stakeholders be involved in the design, implementation and evaluation process? --Jul 19:06, 17 Oct 2006 (EST)'

Future intervention programs sponsored by the DoPN will be more “comprehensive” or “holistic” than current programs and involve Team concepts. Let’s suppose that an area of need is identified, e.g. Homelessness in Denver. The DoPN would (among other things) analyze Denver’s current “[10 Year Plan to Eliminate Homelessness]” and determine if there are any underlying root causes of homelessness that are not being addressed (e.g. lack of affordable housing can be due to a wide range of root causes including lack of meaningful wages, lack of training to acquire skills to obtain meaningful wages, systemic incentives in the housing development and real estate sector that artificially increases the cost of a decent home, etc.)MiltH 20:40, 18 October 2006 (MDT)

Headline text

To take on such a broad analysis and understanding requires a Team of many practitioners – involving specialists in many areas. If I were in the DoPN with fiduciary responsibility to disperse tax dollars where they will be most effective, I would probably look around in society to learn from other models. Our society tends to do reasonable well in a managed competitive environment. Competition can be a good thing when it provides an incentive to try harder. So we might assume that the DoPN would identify and prioritize issues – allocate resources to those areas where there is significant ongoing violence or where there is the highest probability for a conflict / stressful situation to escalate in the form of violence – and identify where an intervention program is needed. The DoPN would provide as much information about the situation as publicly possible and “issue a Request for a Proposal” on how to address this issue. As in other sectors of our American society, Teams will be formed to propose effective solutions.
Wouldn’t it be great to have three proposals for reducing gang violence in Larimer County and each Team was able to provide the rationale and evidence why their program would be effective? Or eliminating homelessness in Denver? Or reducing domestic violence in Aurora? The DoPN would be responsible for evaluating these proposals and selecting the one that has the highest probability of success and is most cost affective (we don’t need to go into detail about the “procurement process, because there are existing branches of government who already do this – we would just have to be sure that peace/nonviolence principles are inherent in this process).
This is then a contract between the Team and the American people (with the DoPN helping identify where people need assistance). It is not a grant – with a contract comes real performance expectations. The winner doesn’t just get a check and walks away. America is a land of Freedom and Responsibility. Sorry to dwell on that – but to get any Conservative support for this Department there has to be accountability and the intervention programs will have to include an element that provides a clear effective path to the Conservative goal of individual self-reliance. On the other hand, Progressives will have to see the element of empathy, nurturing, and opportunity for growth.
Basically the Stakeholders who are “peacemakers” will be directly involved in formulating the local solution/intervention program – typically the intervention program will be implemented by local practitioners because they best understand the culture of the people in need. The Stakeholders who are taxpayers will have some confidence that root causes are being addressed, people who are suffering will be attended to, people who have suffered will experience some form of restorative justice (essential for cases involving trauma), people in need are given meaningful opportunities to heal and become better trained/skilled and be more inclined to become contributing partners in our society (i.e self-reliant). Stakeholders who are the people in need will be cared for, receive the appropriate therapy to move beyond their trauma, feel a part of their community, feel respect, be able to develop a new sense of self worth, acquire new skills and awareness, and actually experience the fun and joy of living in America. Mahetrick 20:16, 14 October 2006 (CDT)

How much of the total USDOP budget will be used in this manner and what are the expected outcomes?

That’s pretty much up to you and others who help make this become a reality. But for talking purpose, let’s pretend.
Bottom Line. I would hope that less than 10% is devoted to increasing the number of Government employees (although it wouldn’t be bad to have 4000 highly trained specialists in the various areas of peacemaking – which the Budget would allow). So there would be at least $7B dollars devoted to Grants and Contracts. Say half to Domestic issues. So $500M to Grants and $3B to real intervention programs implemented by local practitioners that address real problems at the local level.

(b) Domestic Responsibilities- The Secretary shall—

I have interspersed a few comments in the specific text and then have concluded with a range of questions related to the overall structure of the USDOP and its interaction with current programs and efforts.

(1) develop policies that address domestic violence, including spousal abuse, child abuse, and mistreatment of the elderly;

I recommend using the phrase elder abuse as opposed to mistreatment both from a point of consistency as well as recognition of the criminal nature of the act.

Sounds good to this reviewer. Note that the administration of punishment / consequences of illegal/criminal behavior is still the responsibility of the Department of Justice. The Department of Peace and Nonviolence would be focused on the “Why” are people being abusive, “what” are the root causes of this behavior, what programs are effective in changing this behavior, what restorative justice measures are appropriate to help heal/mend the recipients of the violence, and how can we continue to monitor / followup so this abusive behavior does not resume at a later date. I’m not real enamored with the limitations implied by “develop policy.” I would hope the DoPN is more actively involved in identification, assessment, analysis, training, evaluation and identification of “Best Practices” and long term monitoring of effectiveness, etc.Mahetrick 20:50, 14 October 2006 (CDT)

(2) create new policies and incorporate existing programs that reduce drug and alcohol abuse;

I recommend looking at the full range of addictive behaviors – i.e. sex, gambling, internet, debt – it’s the addictive behavior that is key in perpetrating violence not just the object of the addiction , i.e. booze, drugs.

Great idea. We can’t forget that self-inflicted violence may be an early symptom of future more aggressive forms of violence to others.Mahetrick 20:55, 14 October 2006 (CDT)

(3) develop new policies and incorporate existing policies regarding crime, punishment, and rehabilitation;

It may be important to specifically address the issue of sentencing and introduce the concept of restorative justice – mediation versus litigation - and conflict resolution into the wording here.

Great comment! To be acceptable to Conservatives, the DoPN must include the most effective deterrents (punishment, sentencing, etc.) as well as the most appropriate constructive interventions (including restorative justice) designed to change behavior that appeals to Progressive. All programs must include “Best Practices” in both areas. Mahetrick 20:50, 14 October 2006 (CDT)

(4) develop policies to address violence against animals;

How will this interact with local policies – primarily municipal level issues.

Personally I have no idea on how to deal with this item. This opens the scope to the universe. Slaughtering cattle for food now comes into consideration. Getting this legislation into a form that can be passed is going to be very difficult. This one item more than doubles the complexity. Mahetrick 20:50, 14 October 2006 (CDT)

(5) analyze existing policies, employ successful, field-tested programs, and develop new approaches for dealing with the implements of violence, including gun-related violence and the overwhelming presence of handguns;

In speaking to a group of veterans at the American Legion in Golden, we prefaced our comments by re-iterating that the Department of Peace and Nonviolence is charged with the responsibility to uphold the Constitution – including the Second Amendment. That the DoPN Campaign is not going to take an anti-gun position. It would however advocate responsible gun ownership just it would advocate responsible automobile driving – because improper operation has violent and deadly consequences. The DoPN would be constantly asking “Why did Duane Morrison threaten the Harley Davidson store in Littleton saying he may have to come in with an assault rifle?” The DoPN would be asking, “Why wasn’t that threat seem as a big red flag that there was a member of our community who was about to go postal?” (sorry I can’t think of better terminology at the moment). The DoPN would be asking, “Why did our judicial system review the situation and sentence Mr. Morrison to 7 days probation?” The violence at Platte Canyon High School was not a random act. It was clearly telegraphed – but no one was listening – that’s the responsibility of the DoPN – to listen for people in distress. Mahetrick 20:50, 14 October 2006 (CDT)

(6) develop new programs that relate to the societal challenges of school violence, gangs, racial or ethnic violence, violence against gays and lesbians, and police-community relations disputes;

(7) make policy recommendations to the Attorney General regarding civil rights and labor law;

(8) assist in the establishment and funding of community-based violence prevention programs, including violence prevention counseling and peer mediation in schools;

(9) counsel and advocate on behalf of women victimized by violence;

(10) provide for public education programs and counseling strategies concerning hate crimes;

(11) promote racial, religious, and ethnic tolerance;

(12) finance local community initiatives that can draw on neighborhood resources to create peace projects that facilitate the development of conflict resolution at a national level and thereby inform and inspire national policy; and

(13) provide ethical-based and value-based analyses to the Department of Defense.

Given the majority of the current activities exist – although not in a concentrated department or with the stated focus of promoting peace – I have several questions:

The majority of the activities listed are currently funded through existing programs in the: Department of Justice (DOJ); US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS); US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), US Department of Education. Will these funds/programs be transferred to the USDOP?

Good question? I might respond with a quote from Dr. Phil McGraw, “Well how’s that working for you?” We all need to sit down in a quite place and ask ourselves Dr. Phil’s question. If we conclude that our current distributed approach to peace (and violence reduction) is working effectively, then there is no need for change. If we conclude there is a reason to improve, then we might consider a more focused and integrated, collaborative approach. (and I will not use Homeland Security as an example). Mahetrick 20:50, 14 October 2006 (CDT)

Will agencies/NGO's, etc. currently funded through existing programs be retained or will they need to reapply for funding under new standards and guidelines?

The startup of the DoPN will occur over an extended period of time. We could not expect a non-existing Department to be given $8B dollars next year and be able to use it wisely. I’d guess that the transition to a full budget might occur over a 5-10 year period. I suspect that over those 5-10 years, most existing grants/contacts would have ended naturally and new grants/ contracts issued under new sponsorship, performance standards, etc. would be phased in.Mahetrick 20:50, 14 October 2006 (CDT)

If programs will be transferred what will be the budgetary loss or gain by consolidating programs under the USDOP?

Ideally, one would hope that consolidation will result in more efficiency and reduced cost to the tax payer. Although maybe not a preferred approach, there is currently “internal competition” within government – i.e there is some overlap of role and responsibilities – some competition between Center, Agencies, Department, etc. So it may not be the best solution to transfer all “peace” related programs to the new DoPN. The cost of domestic violence in the US is estimated to be $300B annually (paid by each of us via health insurance premiums, lost wages and increased cost of goods & services, etc). If the DoPN can bring about a 3% reduction in violence, it will pay for itself and there is no real net cost to us Americans. A 4% reduction in violence will be a net gain for our country. We need to remember the non-valued cost of violence and positive value of peace (better cooperation, higher productivity, more fun, growth and awareness,…) Mahetrick 20:50, 14 October 2006 (CDT)

Will the USDOP create a consolidated grant application process similar to the HUD SuperNOFA – or will there be multiple application processes?

I’m personally hoping that process models from other agencies will be examined and the DoPN picks the Best of the Best. I also hope that we use grants primarily for research – where the goals and objectives are less defined – and that we use well structured “Contracts” – commitments of expected performance and expected outcomes for the vast majority of the work of the DoPN. We want practitioners to implement effective programs – that are not home backed – but have been through the evaluation process and demonstrated to be effective in restoring justice, changing behavior, managing conflicts, providing opportunities, etc. Mahetrick 20:50, 14 October 2006 (CDT)

Given many of the groups currently engaged in these type of activities are smaller organizations who may have never before received federal funding, what type of technical assistance or infrastructure support will be available to bring them up to speed?

There is an office of Peace Education and Training within the proposed DoPN. This Office could take on the responsibility to help smaller organizations acquire the training that will allow them to “certified” – whatever we decide that is. Most, if not all, successful professions expect (even demand) a certain level of expertise before practitioners are allowed to interact with the public. Peacemakers in any form should be no different (in my opinion). The “competitive” procurement process that I expect will be used, will motivate even the smaller organizations to polish their skills , become certified, or whatever so they too can have a piece of the pie.Mahetrick 20:50, 14 October 2006 (CDT)

What ratio of funding received by the USDOP will be used for direct “on the street” programs and how much will be retained for USDOP direct operations/programming?

See earlier charts for my opinion only. In a lean organization, at least 80-90% of the budget should be linked directly to programs implemented by NGO’s. As a result, these resources are returned directly to the local communities – to help solve problems, heal the wounded, and result in a happier more productive society ( as well as employ a whole bunch of peacemakers). Mahetrick 20:50, 14 October 2006 (CDT)

SEC. 103. PRINCIPAL OFFICERS.

a) Under Secretary of Peace and Nonviolence

There shall be in the Department an Under Secretary of Peace and Nonviolence, who shall be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. During the absence or disability of the Secretary, or in the event of a vacancy in the office of the Secretary, the Under Secretary shall act as Secretary. The Secretary shall designate the order in which other officials of the Department shall act for and perform the functions of the Secretary during the absence or disability of both the Secretary and Under Secretary or in the event of vacancies in both of those offices.

(b) Additional Positions-

(1) There shall be in the Department—

(A) an Assistant Secretary for Peace Education and Training;(

B) an Assistant Secretary for Domestic Peace Activities;

(C) an Assistant Secretary for International Peace Activities;

(D) an Assistant Secretary for Technology for Peace;

(E) an Assistant Secretary for Arms Control and Disarmament;

(F) an Assistant Secretary for Peaceful Coexistence and Nonviolent Conflict Resolution;

(G) an Assistant Secretary for Human and Economic Rights; and

(H) a General Counsel.

How many total employees will the USDOP have – both in Washington and at the Regional Level? How much of the USDOP total budget will be spent on these positions?

See earlier charts. I think if 10% of their budget is skimmed off the top for Government positions that would still employ 1000 Administrators/Managers plus 4000 trained specialists/real workers who would be involved at a national/regional level identifying hot spots, stimulating research, performing analyses and technical reviews, evaluation programs, etc. Because of the influence of culture, local demographics are important to an effective intervention program. As a result, it would be nice to have four Regional Offices – one in the four time zone of Continental US. So there might be 1000 permanent DoPN positions in the Rocky Mountain region - (I just made this up –but it is one possible allocation of the resources)Mahetrick 20:50, 14 October 2006 (CDT)

SEC. 104. OFFICE OF PEACE EDUCATION AND TRAINING.

(c) Grants- The Assistant Secretary of Peace Education and Training shall--

(1) provide peace education grants to colleges and universities for the creation and expansion of peace studies departments; and

Will any non college or university be allowed to participate? What about ecumenical organizations, think tanks like the Carter Center, etc.?

I would hope that the each grant has some goal / objective / expectation associated with it – otherwise we don’t stand a chance of getting any Conservative support for this endeavor - be it training, research, evaluation - some value-added role. With limited resources, I would assume there are criteria established to disperse these grants – as indicated in the hypothetical charts about, one could easily imagine over 1500 grants ranging from 1000 at $100K to several at $50M. I would hope that our most capable organizations (like the Carter Center, and many of the Peace & Justice groups here in Colorado) be included as participants in this grant program. Mahetrick 20:50, 14 October 2006 (CDT)

(2) create a Community Peace Block Grant program under which grants shall be provided to not-for-profit community and nongovernmental organizations for the purposes of developing creative, innovative neighborhood programs for nonviolent conflict resolution and local peace building initiatives.

How will the distribution of block grant funds be determined – what factors will be used to assure regional distribution is equitable throughout the Nation? When will these groups be organized and what will the local make up of groups need to look like? What will be the process for engaging citizens in the planning?

Great questions. You get to propose the best answers to each of these excellent questions. Mahetrick 20:50, 14 October 2006 (CDT)

SEC. 105. OFFICE OF DOMESTIC PEACE ACTIVITIES.

(a) General

There shall be in the Department an Office of Domestic Peace Activities, the head of which shall be the Assistant Secretary for Domestic Peace Activities. The Assistant Secretary for Domestic Peace Activities shall carry out those functions in the Department affecting domestic peace activities, including the development of policies that increase awareness about intervention and counseling on domestic violence and conflict.

(b) Responsibilities- The Assistant Secretary for Domestic Peace Activities shall--

(1) develop policy alternatives for the treatment of drug and alcohol abuse;

(2) develop new policies and build on existing programs responsive to the prevention of crime, including the development of community policing strategies and peaceful settlement skills among police and other public safety officers; and

(3) develop community-based strategies for celebrating diversity and promoting tolerance.

Will the USDOP use a similar process to that HUD to garner community-input, i.e. local community governance boards, local planning processes, etc.? Who within local jurisdictions will be responsible for developing these plans? How much of the money may be kept by municipalities and how much must go out to community focused ventures - and under what terms?

On one hand, we’d expect the DoPN to have local practitioners implement the programs. But I suppose you could construct a model where the DoPN is just a pass through to the “Local Boards, Municipalities, …” and let them do what they want this “earmarked” money.
Again, “How’s that working for us?”
Community involvement is considered one element of “Best Practices” in most intervention programs.
Another good question for your list of things to do Mahetrick 20:50, 14 October 2006 (CDT)

SEC. 107. OFFICE OF TECHNOLOGY FOR PEACE.

(b) Grants

The Assistant Secretary of Technology for Peace shall provide grants for the research and development of technologies in transportation, communications, and energy that—

(1) are nonviolent in their application; and (2) encourage the conservation and sustainability of natural resources in order to prevent future conflicts regarding scarce resources.

These activities engage a whole second set of federal agencies, local funding streams and activities – for example, will the USDOP have interaction now with Greater Outdoors Colorado? If so how? Monetary impact on existing programs? How will this be integrated into existing efforts - eco-psychology, etc.? How much of the USDOP budget is allocated to these activities?

This was one of the least clear Offices to me. Again you are asking great questions. So again you get to propose some answers that can serve as guideline for others. Mahetrick 20:50, 14 October 2006 (CDT)

SEC. 110. OFFICE OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND ECONOMIC RIGHTS.

(4) provide trained observers to work with nongovernmental organizations for purposes of creating a climate that is conducive to the respect for human rights;

Just a side note – the US Government is one of the worst offenders of basic respect for human beings in need. What activities will be established internally to address the disrespectful environment currently in social service agencies?

Again – I would also add a reference to communities of diverse faith.

We certainly agree on this one. We would hope that the existence of the DoPN will be a constant reminder in every Cabinent-level meeting of the principles upon which our country was founded and hopefully remind us to respect our fellow humans – in all facets of our society – including politics • That torture in any form is un-American. o (the underlying reason for a portion of the 5th ”nor shall be compelled to be a witness against himself” The founding fathers understand that this leads to torture and that the value of such intelligence is worthless, because people will say anything to stop the pain and prevent their death. • That no human being is “illegal” • That even non-U.S. citizens enjoy the inalienable right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness • That our real strength is the practice of our ideals in our relationship with all people – it is un-American to impose our Democracy on others. It is American to allow others their right of self-determination. Mahetrick 20:50, 14 October 2006 (CDT)

SEC. 111. INTERGOVERNMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL ON PEACE AND NONVIOLENCE.

(a) General

There shall be in the Department an advisory committee to be known as the Intergovernmental Advisory Council on Peace and Nonviolence (hereinafter in this Act referred to as the `Council'). The Council shall provide assistance and make recommendations to the Secretary and the President concerning intergovernmental policies relating to peace and nonviolent conflict resolution.

What agencies will be involved – what will be the overall power of the Council to implement, nurture and attain systemic change? How is it played out regionally, by state, locally?

Good question. Do you have any models or precedents?Mahetrick 20:50, 14 October 2006 (CDT)

(b) Responsibilities- The Council shall--

(1) provide a forum for representatives of Federal, State, and local governments to discuss peace ADD NON-VIOLENCE issues;

(2) promote better intergovernmental relations; and

(3) submit, biennially or more frequently if determined necessary by the Council, a report to the Secretary, the President, and the Congress reviewing the impact of Federal peace activities on State and local governments.

SEC. 113. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this Act for a fiscal year beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act an amount equal to at least 2 percent of the total amount appropriated for that fiscal year for the Department of Defense.

Will the programs that now will fall under the USDOP retain any and all funding they may have from existing programs? How much of the funds will be put “on the streets” through grant programs – who will conduct the activities, ie. Will USDOP be a provider or a funder?

I haven’t seen any further clarification, although Lynn McMullen (National Campaign) is working on this Appropriations package. I would assume that agencies/programs transferring into the DoPN would also transfer their current budget, and that is then funded within the 2% of DoD allocation/cap. Mahetrick 20:50, 14 October 2006 (CDT)

TITLE II--ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS AND TRANSFERS OF AGENCY FUNCTIONS

SEC. 201. STAFF.

The Secretary may appoint and fix the compensation of such employees as may be necessary to carry out the functions of the Secretary and the Department. Except as otherwise provided by law, such employees shall be appointed in accordance with the civil service laws and their compensation fixed in accordance with title 5 of the United States Code.

SEC. 202. TRANSFERS.

There are hereby transferred to the Department the functions, assets, and personnel of--

(1) the Peace Corps; (What about VISTA, AmeriCorps, Foster Grandparent, etc?)

(2) the United States Institute of Peace;

(3) the Office of the Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security Affairs of the Department of State;

(4) the Gang Resistance Education and Training Program of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms; and


(5) the SafeFutures program of the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention of the Department of Justice.

Is this really all…why these and not others that are already in place…?

SEC. 203. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.

Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall prepare and submit to Congress proposed legislation containing any necessary and appropriate technical and conforming amendments to the laws of the United States to reflect and carry out the provisions of this Act.

How much of this is complete?

I haven’t seen or heard of any of these proposed changes.Mahetrick 20:50, 14 October 2006 (CDT)

TITLE III--FEDERAL INTERAGENCY COMMITTEE ON PEACE AND NONVIOLENCE

SEC. 301. FEDERAL INTERAGENCY COMMITTEE ON PEACE AND NONVIOLENCE.

There is established a Federal Interagency Committee on Peace and Nonviolence (hereinafter in this Act referred to as the `Committee'). The Committee shall—


Will there be corresponding committees at the local level – how will all regions be represented in the planning?




Julieann Murphy Cross is one of our steering-committee volunteerse and team leader for CD7. Julie has been working with non-profits for about 30 years now, and is a real guru with respect not only to the technicalities of grant writing, and administration of 501 c (3)'s, but what the street-level worker's concerns are on a day-to-day basis. When she read the proposed DoP legislation, all sorts of alarm bells went off. All of our meeting last week was consumed with a discussion of the language of the legislation, and how difficult it will be to get existing social justice NGO's who are working with grant money issued by the DHHS, HUD, and other alphabet agencies I can't remember at the moment, to get on board if they think the way they do business with the government is going to get more difficult, or at least change significantly.

The crux of the deal is that these people will be looking at how their grants will be affected by the need to resubmit grant requests to a new department, with new administrators, and perhaps in accordance with new criteria, in order to continue to receive the funds they depend on to provide their essential services to the poor, disenfranchised, and addicted populations they serve. In many cases, these organizations, or more accurately, the administrators of these organizations, have spent several years negotiating the bureaucratic maze to gain approval for their grant requests. They will be very reluctant to sign on to a new overarching Department of Peace, no matter how altruistic their motives may be, or how effective the proposed new department may be, if they perceive that their previous grant work may go down the drain.

Julie went to the trouble of putting together a compilation of the biggest red flags she could see with the legislation. I have taken the liberty of including it below: I think a copy will be forwarded to Milt Hetrick, but maybe this preliminary copy will be useful to you in your discussions with the hierarchy at "national".

Retrieved from "http://www.dopmodel.info/wiki/index.php/Discussion_of_Legislation_-_Domestic_Activities"
Personal tools