Lary Holland: Official Blog, Links, and Resources (Entries tagged as Title IV-D Welfare)

Federal Government Reverses Child Support Enforcement Policies for States

laryholland@sbcglobal.net (Lary Holland) — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 13:01:08 -0400

The federal government recently reversed a policy that required states to contribute to their own child support enforcement programs, now allowing the states to again use federal incentive money to obtain additional federal grant money. Essentially federal taxpayers from other states will now be footing a significant increase for other states' child support enforcement activities as a result of this policy reversal.

Under the Budget Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, federal taxpayers were relieved that states were no longer allowed to "double-dip" out of the federal title iv-d program coffers. It is important to note that under the Title IV-D program the programs established are not essential services for needy families, as over half of the families that receive a benefit do not even qualify for or are at risk of needing other government welfare programs.

The new Recovery Act provision is effective Oct. 1, 2008 through Sept. 30, 2010. States will receive the additional match funding based on any incentive funds used during FY 2009 and FY 2010, including incentives earned and not spent in prior years. States will access the additional funds as they currently do, through grant awards based on quarterly expenditures.

(Source: HHS Makes Estimated $1 Billion in Recovery Act Funds Available to Improve Child Support Enforcement; March 26, 2009; Press Release)

The changes under the spending bill, signed into law by President Obama, coined the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) seems to be a significant spending bill that simply increases the flow of money to government employees and not to the average American citizen, to "further stimulate the economy." Many "Title IV-D" or "Child Support Enforcement" offices were looking at shrinking the size of their offices when they found out they were unable to support paying even a mere one-third of their own expenses to justify their existence. The ARRA now encourages continued federal spending for programs that simply are not sustainable and will only continue to drain the American Taxpayer with more and more funding requests to keep their doors open. The child support enforcement program now lives up to its name of a free-for-all welfare spending program, which amounts to an uncapped spending spree coming out of the American Taxpayers pocketbook.

To see how much additional federal incentive money was provided to each state that got their expenditure reports in, you can visit the HHS Recovery Funds Distribution Website at http://www.hhs.gov/recovery/programs/cse/qtr1awards.html.

Notes

The ARRA ‘09 includes clear expectations that States and other recipients of ARRA '09 stimulus funds will be held accountable for how funds are expended and what benefits are derived from the use of these funds. ACF anticipates requests for spending and performance data that will be posted on the www.recovery.gov web site. Therefore, States should take care to anticipate accountability and transparency requirements and that information on state-reported impact of these expenditures will be available to the public.

States that have not reported expenditures made using incentive funds for the 1st quarter will not receive 1st quarter incentive grants at this time. States with applicable expenditures may revise their 1st quarter reports or include amounts in their 2nd or 3rd quarter estimates. Grants will be issued on a rolling basis promptly after reports are received.

Grant awards reflect 66% of actual expenditures reported by States for the 1st quarter of FY 2009 on Form OCSE-396A, line 1a column A.

Baby Courts? Michigan Should Consider Shaping Its' Own Policies

laryholland@sbcglobal.net (Lary Holland) — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 17:06:02 -0500

Here we go again with the State of Michigan taking on as much federal money and any federally directed mandate it can find. Michigan continually sells out its' own citizens to grow their own bureaucracies as much as possible in exchange for managing as many federal mandates as possible that of course do little to nothing in the way of a social good. I mean seriously Michigan should just allow Congress to take on the roll of Michigan government, because the only laws that Michigan passes are 1. License/Regulation Fee Generating Statutes 2. Statutes to comply with federal grant programs 3. Statutes to comply with federal mandates and incentives. At least having Congress just do it directly would save us a layer of government bureaucracy.

Baby Court? As defined by the Saginas News as "Baby Court aims to make changes for abused and neglected children from newborns to age 3, said Jerry Kole, Midland County trial court administrator. He said 15-20 Midland children per year are involved. Often the court terminates or releases parental rights, while other parents learn parenting skills, he said."

What does a specialty "Baby Court" really mean? It means first and foremost that a federal grant enabled this program under a poorly thought out federal mandate. Secondly for each removal of a child or children that occurs it generates immense alternative federal revenue for the state in the way of allowing multiple child support orders where there is more than one parent involved (Federal Title IV-D Grant Money), additional food stamp, medicare, and cash benefit participation counts, and ancillary fees generated from the poorly administered foster care (Federal Title IV-E Grant Money) grants and incentive monies when the child or children are placed temporarily or permanently in alternative living environments.

The entire article can be found in the March 5, 2009 Saginaw News under the article titled Midland's "Baby Court" focuses on bad parenting skills. The real name of the article should read something to the effect of "Midland 'Baby Court' takes aim at generating more federal revenue to state bureaucrats."

Bullent points from the article are:

Midland County Commissioners have approved the first contracts under a pilot project grant of $299,607 for Baby Court.
Probate Judge Doreen Allen oversees the program and two part-time specialists.
The county will pay $5,000 per year to Legacy Center for Student Success for data collection and analysis.
It will pay $63,456 to Community Mental Health of Central Michigan for infant mental health services and $20,000 to Mid-Michigan Community Action Service for home visits and reports.

I am looking forward to seeing how much money Genesee and Wayne County wastes on this project as well. Nearly every one of the federal programs associated with these courts have serious deficiencies in their administration, especial the foster care system. This is a classic occurrence where exceptions become the rule to abide to poorly thought out federal government mandates instead of maintaining there are a few exceptions to a real properly thought out rule. Who sets up an exclusive court for 15 - 20 cases a year anyways?
Say no to these "specialty courts" because they are designed for revenue generation not for the proper administration of justice.

Newsok: Custody Loss Leads Father to Fight DHS

laryholland@sbcglobal.net (Lary Holland) — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 11:10:06 -0500

I can't vouch for the personal issues in the case associated with this NewsOk.Com article, "Custody Loss Leads Father to Fight DHS.," but what I can do is share a comment that I posted in the discussion section regarding "overhauling DHS."

One way to overhaul DHS is to take away immunity in certain regards. Check out Connecticut Bill Number 636. http://www.laryholland.com/serendipity/archives/578-Connecticut-Proposed-Bill-No.-636-Presumed-Innocence-and-Preservation-of-Constitutional-Rights.html. Essentially you have to insure that government is accountabile for an intrusion of this magnitude, and there certainly should be penalties in the event government officials infringed unnecessarily on a protected liberty. Parental Rights must be respected and protected by all. Simple as that.

Get Your Justice Live - Mar 2, 2009 at 9:24 AM

It is important to bring up public policy discussions between states because the issues are uniform nationwide. Lack of judicial accountability, lack of bureaucrat accountability, and unnecessary intrusions into protected relationships and liberties. It doesn't take long to engage in the public debate. At the time of this writing, the site they mention in the report was unavailable. A cached version of the website for their change request is State Question 745 in Oklahoma. They need around 117,013 signatures for their State Question which we will be discussing in a future update. Our point in this entry is nothing more than to demonstrate that you all need to become part of the national voice for change.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

laryholland@sbcglobal.net (Lary Holland) — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 12:49:58 -0500

I decided that it's time to jump in on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. This is a disturbing proposition for America. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 is loaded with special interest pork and government job protection. Sometimes, I think these bills should read the The American Taxpayer Cash Diversion Program to protect Government Bureaucrats. The purposes they claim for both the House and Senate Bills respectively...

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h1/show

Making supplemental appropriations for job preservation and creation, infrastructure investment, energy efficiency and science, assistance to the unemployed, and State and local fiscal stabilization, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes.

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s1/show

A bill to create jobs, restore economic growth, and strengthen America's middle class through measures that modernize the nation's infrastructure, enhance America's energy independence, expand educational opportunities, preserve and improve affordable health care, provide tax relief, and protect those in greatest need, and for other purposes.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 has many flaws, other than of course reinvesting working people's income into non-working people's pockets as if it will actually stimulate or sustain an economy. IE: Socialism and Communism have both tried it to their despair. The thing about these programs are that they erode true equal protection in the way that people no longer have equal opportunities. Instead the people are being drained financially to support those that do not participate fully in the free economy marketplace. I am convinced that bills like this further erode our economy, weakening our dollar, and undermining basic liberties and freedoms for the average citizen.

One of my main concerns is that our Congressmen think they can change the wording and convince people that something bad is really good by coming up with a beneficial sounding title. Taxpayer cash diversion programs that don't stimulate production have a negative effect on sustaining an economy for the long term. A particular area of concern with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 is that States will no longer have to contribute to their own dysfunctional family court system. Instead the States want to just keep receiving huge incentives for having larger family court and child support caseloads which is like a huge negative reward for social dysfunction. Breaking down the family unit however, will lead to complete implosion of our economic structure by itself whether or not done in conjunction with this reinvestment bill.

In 2005 the Deficit Reduction Act (2005) was passed that in pertinent part sealed a loophole that allowed the states participating in the voluntary program to "double dip." Under Sec. 7309 which ended federal matching of state spending of federal incentive payments and to require a fee for successful child support collection not on TANF.

Sec. 7309(a) In General- Section 455(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 655(a)(1)) is amended by inserting from amounts paid to the State under section 458 or' before `to carry out an agreement'.
Sec. 7310 also requires a Mandatory Fee for Successful Child Support Collection for Family That has Never Received TANF.

In the past, before the spending loophole was closed by the federal government to protect taxpayer interests, what was happening was that a state was spending a federal incentive dollar to get more federal grant money and not contributing anything to the program itself. This obviously is and was a drain on taxpayers in the past, especially when states like California take up 1/5 of the entire allocated funds that are set aside for the whole nation. The Budget Deficit Reduction Act above requires that for non-welfare recipients that $25.00 a year be paid for the services they are receiving from the government.

Women's groups and other special interest lobbies are crying foul, because they don't believe that the state or recipients should have to pay for their fair share of the services, and wants the entire taxpayer population to endure the drain on the public resources whether or not that recipient even qualifies for other welfare services.

At the very least, reinstating the funding loophole is irresponsible, but the program for child support and family court should be limited to those that are eligible to receive actual TANF benefits, else the beneficiaries should pay for the services themselves and leave the taxpayers out of the loop.

Where is the value to society?

laryholland@sbcglobal.net (Lary Holland) — Thu, 08 May 2008 12:47:19 -0400

Society has done a wonderful job at claiming that "child support" is a special kind of "debt." Society has also done a wonderful job in convincing the public that people sentenced for owing debt to prisons nationwide is a good thing. Where is the societal value in placing a 51-year old man in PRISON for years on a debt that is likely going to cause a significant recitivism rate, especially since once this man gets out his employment is likely going to be minimum wage work? Who is really penalized by this? The taxpayers are penalized more than anyone, as well as this man's children.

The child support enforcement program was intended to pay back the federal government for welfare payments they were making to the States to operate their social welfare programs. What is odd, is that the program has morphed into a cumbersome and bloated bureucratic machine that doesn't benefit society, only those that are directly employed by the system. If anything, the programs are encouraging more out of wedlock births, more fights over money, and more dissolutions of marriage because it is now financially beneficial to separate. The government is simply glorifying the bad behaviors of society while punishing the tax payer. Read the below article and tell me where the value to society is.

Man to serve time for back child support
From Wire Reports

A 51-year-old Kosciusko man was sentenced to 10 years in prison with eight suspended and ordered to pay $68,215.87 in back child support. [This man will likely no longer be as marketable when he gets out of prison, therefore reducing his earnings potential and contribution to society dramatically.]

Dennis Kern was sentenced Wednesday, April 30, by Oktibbeha County Circuit Court Judge Lee Howard on charges of refusing to provide for the support and maintenance of his children.

The case was prosecuted by Mississippi's attorney general. [This AG should have been focusing on serious crimes.]

The court ordered Kern to start paying the owed child support payments 60 days after his release from prison. [Unlikely because most employers will not want ex-cons working for them.]

He will be on supervised probation once he's out. [More Fees for the System]

Theft Running Rampid in State Child Support Programs

laryholland@sbcglobal.net (Lary Holland) — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 12:00:41 -0500

I have been following a fair number of reports where individuals are being caught embezzling from the tax payers, committing fraudulent transfers, and identity theft through the various State Child Support Programs. The programs have grown so quickly that there is insufficient oversight to ensure that the programs help those who have need. Instead the programs are bloated with over-participation and lack of oversight.

The Keizertimes is a publication for the Keizer community, and focuses on Keizer-specific news and events. Recently it reported Former DOJ employee charged with ID theft. It wasn't just identity theft though, it was actual theft from the tax payers and children as well. There has been a tremendous amount of liability associated with identity theft from the State operated and Federally funded child support enforcement programs.

Original Story Published 2-29-08: http://www.keizertimes.com/news/story.cfm?story_no=9130

A theft investigation spanning nearly six months culminated in the arrest of two Keizer residents on Friday, Feb. 22.

The lack of oversight involved in the State Child Support Programs are definitely causing more harm than good when it comes to the potential for identity theft, fraud, and embezzlement.

The state sends out child support payments on a ReliaCard debit system. The investigation began when a woman receiving child support payments said more than $7,000 in child support payments were missing from her account. The victim's card had been mailed to a vacant address in Keizer and had been used to withdraw funds from Salem and Keizer-area automated teller machines.

Don't forget the article Identity Theft: Opt Out Of Family Court Services!

More fraud and embezzlement below!

Fort Bend Woman Guilty in Child Support Fraud Ring

If it isn't the actual child support enforcement officers stealing from the taxpayers, then its more greedy participants aiming to defraud taxpayers, parents, and children of green. The Title IV-D program is
plagued with over participation, fraud, and misrepresentation to the public that money is destined for children, but in reality the money goes into everyone else's pockets but the children's. The Katy Times, serving Katy, Tx and the surrounding suburban communities released the story on June 1, 2007 about a Fort Bend, Indiana Woman being found guilty in another Child Support Fraud Scheme. (Katy Times,
"Fort Bend Woman Guilty in Child Support Fraud Ring," June 1, 2007)

Child Support Worker Arrested In Bribery Scheme http://www.laryholland.com/serendipity/archives/329-Child-Support-Worker-Arrested-in-Bribery-Scheme.html
Title IV-D Employee Embezzles Quarter of Million in Child Support Money http://www.laryholland.com/serendipity/archives/311-Title-IV-D-Employee-Embezzles-Quarter-of-Million-in-Child-Support-Enforcement-Money.html

Support THE Movie: Its about the kids...

laryholland@sbcglobal.net (Lary Holland) — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 12:27:16 -0500

SUPPORT THE MOVIE

It's about the kids. There is no harsher sanction than to be separated from your children. Children should never be asked who they love more. I'm living out of the bus, I'm going to change the world.

I cry at nights because I know there is nothing that can be done about anything. If you have money people listen to you if you don't have money the court system really sucks.

Justice delayed is justice denied!

Parental Suicide does go up 5 times for fit parents that are removed from their children.

It's destroyed me financially.

They know they can grind you down.

The system isn't built to put the family back together.

You can't stop and just sit down and say, I don't want to play anymore.

The Family Court System is BROKEN. Visit the website: SUPPORT THE MOVIE!
Check out this video: Its about the kids

State Strives to Maintain Monopoly Over Child Support Enforcement Services

laryholland@sbcglobal.net (Lary Holland) — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:12:23 -0500

The Commonwealth State of Virginia has been reported from multiple sources to be suing the Texas-based private child-support collection agency known as SupportKids, Inc. In a political atmosphere where budgets are tight, some states are struggling to maintain their monopolies where they can instead of sharing markets with private firms, saving taxpayers billions nationwide.

The state is suing Supportkids Inc., a private child support collection
company based in Texas, to prevent the company from interfering with
the enforcement of child support in the Commonwealth.

Governor Tim Kaine and State Attorney General Bob McDonnell
announced the lawsuit today (Friday). “Any actions that impede the
Commonwealth’s efforts to lawfully and fairly collect child support
must be addressed,” Governor Kaine said in a news release.₁

The various state child support agencies are funded through a federal grant and incentive program under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act₂. For every three dollars spent by a local state agency for actions like paternity establishment, child support enforcement, and creation of child support orders, the local agency only has to contribute $1.00 while the Federal government pays the State and Local agencies $2.00. This program has been referred to as a "Free For All Welfare Program" where the overwhelming majority of the program are middle and upper-class families fighting over money and the more actions that the local agency takes the more money they receive from the Federal Government.

When private firms refuse to work with the State and Local agencies, despite an individual parent contracting with a private collection firm, there actually exists the potential to cost the State and Local agencies federal funds. With a loss of federal funds, State and Local agencies look for additional ways to bolster membership by requiring nearly every case involving children and spousal support to go through their local Title IV-D offices despite not being means tested for need like other government welfare programs. Essentially the programs reward for a negative result instead of positive results of actually solving a root societal problem.

Families typically
turn to a private, for-profit child-support collection agency when the state
has not been successful in collecting payments.
According to the
Supportkids' Web site, the company has collected more than $360 million since
1991 on behalf of clients, making it the largest private child-support
collection company in the country.
In the news release
about the lawsuit, Kaine said Virginia's Child Support Enforcement agency
collected more than $608 million last year for 484,000 children who are owed
money. ₃

SupportKids, Inc. has claimed to be successful at collections where many State and Local agencies have failed and if a parent contracts with such a collection service they should be allowed to do so instead of requiring a parent to use government and tax payer subsidized programs against their will. Right now the tax payers are paying for the entire expense of child support enforcement and other services at the federal, state, and local level and if participants would rather do business on their own dime instead of the taxpayers dime we should certainly encourage it.

Necessary changes to the national child support program should be implemented to remove the multitude of cases nationwide that do not qualify for current state aid programs and allow parents to conduct business with whatever firm in their judgment will get the desired result. Society cannot force business owners to chose between one or more collection agents, so government shouldn't be able to force parents to work with a government monopoly where there are clear alternatives that do not cost the taxpayer. Child Support orders are regular civil judgments and should be treated accordingly not as a business for our federal, state, and local governments to subsidize bloated bureaucracies.

_{1. WSLS News, February 8, 2008, http://www.wsls.com/sls/news/state_regional/article/virginia_sues_texas_company_over_child_support_enforcement/5283/}

_{2. Social Security, Welfare, and Child Support Enforcement, February 2006, Lary Holland & Jason Bottomley, http://www.laryholland.com/ssacse}

_{3. The Virginian-Pilot, February 9, 2008, http://hamptonroads.com/2008/02/va-sues-texas-collection-agency-over-child-support-payments}

Delaware Residents Calling for Child Support Reforms

laryholland@sbcglobal.net (Lary Holland) — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 17:01:32 -0500

Political unrest continues in Delaware and other states regarding the tyrannical and systematical exclusion of one parent from children's lives in lieu of steep financial gains by both special interests and government.
(Original Publication: Delaware Online: Letters to Editor: January 26, 2008)

Child support system reforms are needed

Our child support system leaves a lot to be desired.

One doesn't have to look too hard to read about a 'dead beat' dad who isn't paying his child support.

However, no one mentions those dads who pay their child support,
month after month, often at the expense of their own basic costs of
living, i.e., rent, gas, groceries. A system that compels many fathers
to live like paupers until their children turn 18 needs to be
re-evaluated and reformed

Betty Sue Scott, Wilmington

No Good Deed Goes Unpunished: Judge Rules To Increase His Budget

laryholland@sbcglobal.net (Lary Holland) — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 09:44:36 -0500

In this NewsDay.Com article the Court says that a sperm donor is liable for child support without giving the father any opportunity to even prove whether or not he is the father.

Nassau County Family Court Judge Ellen Greenberg ruled on Nov. 16 that despite
the mother's willingness to have the child's DNA tested, the man was barred
from seeking a paternity test to determine if he is truly the father because
the results could have a "traumatic effect" upon the child, who is
now 18 years old and lives in Oregon with the mother. The next step is a
meeting with a support magistrate to determine the amount of child support
payments - if any - the man would have to pay until the teen turns 21, Kelly
said

Just another example of how the child support enforcement industry wants to increase the numbers and collection rates to justify their own existence. Read the complete story below.

newsday.com/news/local/crime/ny-lifath015484074dec01,0,1707390.story

Reporter Doesn't Ask Any Questions: TMJ4 Milwaukee, Wisconsin

laryholland@sbcglobal.net (Lary Holland) — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 02:10:24 -0400

John Mercure frequently targets child support obligors in his news stories.

A recent I-Team investigations by John Mercure, TMJ4 in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, seemed very irresponsible by falling prey to printing the same bureaucratic spin that is being released all over the country by concerned child support collection officers that are trying to keep their comfy government jobs at the expense of the taxpayers. Instead of rebutting the article, I took a moment to look up some statistics regarding Wisconsin's Title IV-D child support program.

Most child support collections are made for families who have never been on assistance! The program was originally intended to recuperate money expended by the federal government to the states for their welfare programs. Now the taxpayer is caught funding a glorified collection service for middle and upper income feuding families!
The most effective form of collection is through income withholding orders through Fiscal Year 2006. Income Withholding Orders are an automated task that doesn't require employees.
The Financial Data Match program is a computer generated list that is matched up electronically by the State's data contractors. This sweeps money from obligors' accounts automatically and doesn't take additional employees.
Federal and State Income Tax Off-Sets are another highly effective method of collection child support according to the federal government reports on Child Support collections. This again does not take additional employees.
Wisconsin's Total Administrative Expenses, which as of today are unaudited and likely to be plagued with immense overspending, total $108,692,436.00! At least $777,010.00 of the administrative expenses weren't even for Title IV-D / Collection services.
NON-TANF (should be income ineligible to receive government services at taxpayer expense) collections continued to increase in Fiscal Year 2006, While the collections on cases that are Welfare cases DECLINED according to federal reports.
Wisconsin has a central child support distribution center for receiving and distributing child support funds and the local county offices no longer perform this intensive function.

The program should become more efficient over time and require less employees and the middle and upper income feuding families should be removed from the program, instead the program is getting larger and claiming to need more funds to operate. The State should not focus their programs on revenue generation but on aid to needy families. This will save the taxpayers immensely. An equal custody mandate would go along way in solving expense problems as well.

A final note on child support is that the I-TEAM should be focusing its attention on ensuring that the State of Wisconsin doesn't steal money from these poor children by not distributing collected child support. In Fiscal Year 2006 there is NET UNDISTRIBUTED CHILD SUPPORT COLLECTIONS OF $8,210,847 according to the Federal Child Support Preliminary Report for 2006. Of that Net UDC at least 8.6% of it has been completely unresolved. If this money is not distributed within one year from the date of collection the state is allowed to escheat the money into its own budget as program income, taking it out of reach of the children it was collected for! This makes it worthwhile for the State to sit on the money. Why not locate these parents and get this money distributed before it is stolen from these poor children!

John Mercure's email address is jmercure@todaystmj4.com.You can voice your opinion on the subject to him via email or peruse his blog, which has a few child support issues listed at http://www.todaystmj4.com/bloggers/mercure. Let me know if you get a response to your inquiries and I would be happy to post them here at this site.

California Senator's Vote Unaminously to Bring Back Indentured Servitude

laryholland@sbcglobal.net (Lary Holland) — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 23:17:19 -0400

This button just seemed appropriate... but I ask.. will the residents of California truly overcome such tyranny or just let it pass without a fight?

Has California's Senators voted unaminously to bring back indentured servitude? The California Political Desk in the California Chronicle today reported that the State Senate "today unaminmously (38-0) passed legislation to help increase the number of child support payments collected in San Mateo County," which further states "...would establish a program in San Mateo County to provide judges with the discretion to order an unemployed child support obligor to seek work at the time of the initial hearing determining such support." ("Yee's Bill To Strengthen Child Support Laws Approved." California Chronicle 6 Sept. 2007)

Basically, I call laws like the above a "Minority Report Approach" to legislation, based on the Tom Cruise movie Minority Report. The premise of the movie was that three "pre-cognitives" could see into the future and determine a crime before it was committed and arrest the individual before they engaged in the criminal activity. Only one problem, the "pre-cogs" didn't always agree so the "system" would cover up the mistakes of the pre-cogs. Also, the movie raises an interesting philosophy that since an act was not committed yet, could they be found truly guilty of the crime "before it even happened?" In Tom Cruise's case, he demonstrated that the future was not always certain. In the above California Legislation, California Senators are attempting to force someone to perform an act before there is even a crime, as required by our Constitution. But...this is family court right? Now remember that child support is merely a civil debt and no crime has been committed leading up to the order of such debt to be paid to another party.

For those of you unfamiliar with the Constitution, the document that
restricts governmental powers, there was an Amendment that completed
Ratification on December 6, 1865. Under US Const. Amendment 13 Sec. 1 "Neither
slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for a crime
whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within
the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." Either California isn't part of the United States, or California and other states
are trying to take more authority than what they actually have. The

The U.S. Supreme Court, in United States v. Kozminski (1988), has defined involuntary servitude as "compulsory service by the use of physical restraint or injury, or by the use or threat of coercion through legal process."
Essentially the program as defined above, as well
as the many court orders forcing individuals to participate in
government welfare programs without compensation because there exists a
civil debt or other civil judgment, is nothing more than a return to
the slave trade and indentured servitude that was outlawed just a mere
142 years ago.

Federal Cuts Will Not Put More W. VA Families On Welfare

laryholland@sbcglobal.net (Lary Holland) — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 22:38:54 -0400

The child support program rewards the states for actually creating broken homes and is an obstacle to shared equal parenting. Check out http://www.nationwideblueprint.com for more information about the program.
Articles are coming out across the board in Virginia and other states portraying that the child support program is ripping off poor mothers and poor families because of a $25.00 application fee after it has been determined the agency has distributed $500.00 or more in a calendar year. The propaganda couldn't be further from the truth and is simply untrue. My general response is that the State bureaucracies are just trying to solidify their position as savior to keep their jobs by rewarding a single party with a negative outcome, which is broken homes. Our irresponsible and wasteful government at work. My general editorial response (198 words) is pretty much as follows:

Federal cuts will not put more W. VA
families on welfare. This is a smokescreen that state bureaucracies put up in
an attempt to maintain comfy government employment with lush benefits.

The child support programs were intended to recuperate money
provided by the federal government to the states for welfare. This turned the
states that participate in voluntary Title IV-D programs into taxpayer
subsidized collection agencies. States now focus on revenue generation by
forcing middle and upper-income families into these “free for all” welfare
programs.

The states have created their own dilemma by trying to
artificially increase their participation numbers instead of focusing on families
that need them most, the lower income participants. Only 11% of the cases
should qualify for services on the taxpayer dime; people already eligible for
other state welfare programs.

There are sufficient private collection firms to make up the
difference of any budget cuts by removing nearly half the caseload which
shouldn’t qualify or be eligible for free government services in the first
place. Adding restrictions and removing income ineligible families will
streamline the agency and force the state to focus their programs on aid to
needy families and save the taxpayers immensely.

Virginia Child Support Agencies Complaining About Fees

laryholland@sbcglobal.net (Lary Holland) — Wed, 22 Aug 2007 20:35:00 -0400

The Anti-Family Child Support War Mongers are clamoring their hammers on their shields because they don't think that an individual who benefits from their programs should have to pay a small $25.00 fee after receiving $500.00 or more dollars through the program. Bloggers at ReadExpress.Com and a few other sites have been disagreeing with the fee that is being imposed on the beneficiaries of the voluntary program.

I took the time to write about this exact issue when Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley was complaining of the same issue. You can view my initial response at the Nationwide Blueprint for Title IV-D Reform Website. Just like in Iowa and every other state in the United States of America, the State participation is voluntary. The States knew that the application fee was going to be a requirement and chose to sign up for the program anyways. Now they seek to change the rules and continue a trend of rewarding individuals and bureaucracies for negative outcomes instead of positive outcomes.

Just like in Iowa, The Virginia program suffers tremendous over participation of families that are 150% or higher above the poverty-line. Because of the significant level of over participation from wealthier families receiving voluntary services at no cost the failure of collections for the mandatory lower-income participants are going unnoticed while the program is being touted as a success. Essentially the mandatory participation in the state child support enforcement program by families receiving other forms of government assistance are being left behind while the state focuses on adding higher-income families and focusing resources on easier targets through income-withholding orders to continue maximizing federal funding received by the state of Virginia.

Similarly, since the super majority of the participants are families that are over the 150% threshold of poverty, there should be no reason that the beneficiaries of the programs, when proven successful, receive services at no cost. We need to reduce taxpayer burden and add proper eligibility requirements to restrict program participation. Free for all spending on these programs is irresponsible use of the taxpayer money and nothing more than fuel for a growing, federally subsidized, bureaucracy. When the federal funding dries up, the burden is going to become an immediate emergency associated with funding an oversized bureaucracy that will eventually rest on the shoulders of the local taxpayers that will not be able to foot the entire bill.

Bloggers need to understand the issues at hand before repeating the propaganda of State and Federal officials by doing a little research. Afterall, if they don't do the research they will be no better than the average news release service.

Eyewitness News Reports on Child Support Snafu

laryholland@sbcglobal.net (Lary Holland) — Wed, 22 Aug 2007 20:30:00 -0400

Eyewitness (ABC NEWS) Channel 11 in Raleigh, North Carolina did a story on a recent Child Support Snafu http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=troubleshooter&id=5594128 which has lead to at least one frustrated individual that has been plagued by the child support industry.

Every year Luis has to file a motion to challenge the findings. He says, "They see that I'm right and they will dismiss it every year."

I took the time to post a few comments about why this individual has had such a problem because I think what is happening is such an incredible waste of taxpayer dollars:

The reason that the Child Support Agency wants to show an arrearage in this gentleman's case is because it allows them to claim that they are collecting at a higher percentage on arrearage cases. The child support or Title IV-D agency receives more money if they can show that they are performing exceptionally well on "arrearages."

Each case that these "child support" agencies open they get paid more federal money. So for each 1.00 that they spend, they receive 2.00 additional dollars from the Federal Taxpayers. This amounts to welfare for middle and upper class families at the complete expense of the taxpayer. Give me a break people. These people are making good money and should not be receiving welfare services. Basically the person that is receiving the free benefit, which is the court created "custodial" parent so they should have to pay.

Our judiciary has been sold out under cooperative agreements so that they create these orders and get paid as a direct result of their decisions. We no longer have an independent judiciary, but a miner and sapper of our individual rights.

Child Support Snafus are not something that are unique to just North Carolina. They are happening throughout the United States due to immense caseloads associated with the highly competitive child support industry. The caseloads are so critical high and the errors are so common due to the State program directors packing as many middle and upper class feuding families into the programs. By padding the participation numbers the agencies receive more federal matching funds at taxpayer expense. The program no longer focuses on recovering debt associated with welfare expenes and now focuses almost solely on revenue generation for the State budgets. Children are now worth a specific amount of money when "enrolled" into these free for all welfare programs that lack proper restrictive eligibility requirements. Restricting participation would reduce errors and increase efficiency, while bringing the programs' focus back to aid for needy families.

On top of the Snafus there are an immense number of other problems, including criminal activity associated with the various state child support programs. Just review the articles and information below to see how far the problems actually go.

Here are some great examples of what can happen with citizens' information that is in the hands of incompetent state agencies:

Child Support Paperwork Glitch Exposes Private Information of over 10,000 Citizens: HERE
Mounting Accountability Problems With Child Support Programs: HERE
Identity Theft:: Opt Out of Family Court Services Before it Happens to YOU!: HERE
Privatization, Identity Theft, and Crony Capitalism" http://www.unbossed.com/index.php?itemid=1186
Hacker Breaks Into Nebraska Child-Support Database" FoxNews.Com, June 29, 2006
Vermont Computer Hacked: 70,000 users at risk" Lock Down Your Identity January 30, 2007
California Faxes 1170 Citizen's Private Information to Wrong Place: Press Release: California DCSS January 30, 2007

Additional Criminal Activities that may already be occuring with your private information:

Child Support Clerk Charged With Embezzlement: More Government Corruption: http://www.laryholland.com/serendipity/archives/402-Child-Support-Clerk-Charged-With-Embezzlement-More-Government-Corruption.html
Two Maine Media Outlets Report More Thieving Title IV-D/CSE Employees: http://www.laryholland.com/serendipity/archives/367-Two-Maine-Media-Outlets-Report-More-Thieving-Title-IV-DCSE-Employees.html
Fort Bend Woman Guilty in Child Support Ring: http://www.laryholland.com/serendipity/archives/366-Fort-Bend-Woman-Guilty-in-Child-Support-Fraud-Ring.html
Child Support Worker Arrested In Bribery Scheme: http://www.laryholland.com/serendipity/archives/329-Child-Support-Worker-Arrested-in-Bribery-Scheme.html
Title IV-D Employee Embezzles Quarter of Million in Child Support Money: http://www.laryholland.com/serendipity/archives/311-Title-IV-D-Employee-Embezzles-Quarter-of-Million-in-Child-Support-Enforcement-Money.html