A fugitive people within a nation is tyranny.

Posts tagged ‘legislate’

States: Fear All Around

by Idaho senator, Mary Souza

justice and moneyFear was evident on both sides of the Child Support bill we were called back to consider last Monday for the Special Session. The House and Senate Judiciary & Rules Joint Committee, of which I am a member, heard nearly 5 hours of testimony, and much of it was based in fear. Those supporting the bill were afraid Idaho’s child support collection system would dissolve without passage of the bill, leaving children and families in dire straits. Those opposed to the bill were worried about loss of constitutional due process and opening our laws to foreign influence. Are any of these people crazy or worthy of ridicule or reprisal? Of course not. Concerns and questions must always be respected.

This was a tricky and complicated piece of legislation. Lack of communication from the Administration left important questions unanswered, which fanned the flames of fear on all sides and caused the need for the special session.

empty-pockets-robbed-court-orderIn my position as the new Senator from Coeur d’Alene, I talked with and heard from a great number of constituents before the special session. Many were in favor, many opposed, but all were very worried. I studied the bill, in depth, on my own and conferred with others. Then I asked questions of a number of attorneys and, as you might guess, heard differing overall views. There were some consistent answers, however, and several of the most important areas of agreement were:

1. The international treaty on child support collection, which is the root of the federal push for this legislation, cannot become more powerful than our US Constitution. No treaty can.

2. Due process is protected for Idahoans involved in child support through foreign countries, and the Idaho court has the right to dismiss a support request if the other country’s laws are “manifestly incompatible” with our public policies.

3. Since 1996, Idaho has had reciprocal child support relationships with 16 foreign countries without significant problems.

4. Child support collection would continue in Idaho, if the bill did not pass, but it there would be a period of uncertainty and possible disruption, until alternate plans could be put in place.

rich guyI voted to approve the bill because of the potential disruption. It passed the House 49-21 and the Senate 33-2. But I remain unhappy, as do most legislators, with the coercive methods used by the Federal government to force states’ approval of this bill. The Feds fueled fear by threatening to withdraw the entire $43 million dollar grant Idaho uses to collect child support payments if the bill was not approved exactly as written and within their dictated timeframe. They also threatened to close our access to the federal database portal used to track the parents responsible to pay for their children.

This just underscores my overall frustration that, too often in Boise, we legislate out of fear… fear of losing Federal money. A significant and growing portion of Idaho’s state budget, nearly 35%, comes from Washington DC. We receive large sums of money for transportation, health and welfare, education and more. And we all know those who give the money hold the strings.

There is legal precedence, however, for states to challenge the hammer of the Federal government when they threaten to remove funding for an existing program as coercion to entice additional action. US Supreme Court Justice Roberts wrote a clear opinion on a recent case about state Medicaid funds. “The States…object that Congress has ‘crossed the line distinguishing encouragement from coercion’…The State’s claim that this threat serves no purpose other than to force unwilling States to sign up for the dramatic expansion of health care coverage affected by the act. Given the nature and the threat and the programs at issue here we must agree.”

welfare queenThere’s more to his legal opinion, of course, but Idaho continues to allow Federal dollars to dictate many of our decisions. To push back would require a show of will and coordination from the Administration, which is not in evidence right now.

Our Founding Fathers were concerned about the power of the then newly formed central government, and feared its future growth could alter the balance of power in our country. Thomas Jefferson expressed this key belief when he reminded, “The federal government is our servant, not our master!”

States have become dependent on Federal money, corporations that are mostly concerned with feeding themselves. The views of this senator don’t begin to address the reality of the system, for all Americans.

This poor senator. She doesn’t realize that she had already undercut the U.S. Constitution by going along with the Feds. She wrote this in an effort to try to absolve her conscience before her constituents. Poor. Pathetic. Stupid. – Rathbone

overthrow

Freedom Under Attack by Lawmakers

Everyone knows that a protective order is commonly issued under all kinds of circumstances. A protective order can be fraudulently issued as well. This kind of topic is likely to affect the lives of custodial and non-custodial parents alike as federal lawmakers seek to invade your civil rights and privacy under the pretense of safety and justice. Repeal Bradley has enclosed the name of the lawmakers that are concerned about taking your freedoms away and imposing draconian laws.

New York State Senator Andrew J. Lanza, R, District 24 (Staten Island), has introduced Senate Bill S4796, which, if passed into law, would require that anyone who has had an order of protection issued against them must wear at all times a GPS monitoring/tracking device. Further, tampering with and/or disabeling the device would constitute a Class E Felony. “Justification” for the measure is the puported “need to put more teeth into orders of protection in order for them to mean more than just a piece of paper”.

New York State Assemblyman Felix Ortiz, D, District 51 (Kings County/Brooklyn) has introduced a “same as” bill in the Assemby, A5424.

Each bill proposal is currently in the Codes Committee of its respective chamber. Both are said to have broad bi-partisan support in each house of the Legislature. You need to be aware of this fact.

This legislative insanity should send ice water surging through the veins of anyone who has ever had the dubious pleasure of having experienced the Kafkaesque world of the restraining order. Simply put, it means that anyone – whether guilty … or totally innocent – accused of domestic abuse will be put under police surveillance 24/7 via an electronic monitoring/tracking device, with no due process, no, trial, no recourse, and no remedial and/or statutory protections.
These bills are co/multi-sponsored by:

Senators John J. Flanagan, Charles J. Fuschillo, Jr., Joseph A. Griffo, Kemp Hannon, William J. Larkin, Jr., Elizabeth O’C. Little, Serphin R. Maltese, George D. Maziarz, Frank Padavan, Dale M. Volker, Catherine M. Young

Assembly Members: Lou Tobacco, Ginny Fields, Ellen Young, David Koons, Sandra Galef, Michelle Schimel, Dennis H. Gabryszak, Alan Maisel, Steve Englebright, Ivan C. LaFayette, Janele Hyer-Spencer, Nettie Mayersohn, David G. McDonough, Annette, Robinson, Robert K. Sweeney, Harvey Weisenberg

NO ONE SHOULD HAVE TO ASK WHAT HIS/HER NEXT STEP NEEDS TO BE, NOW …, AND REMEMBER, NEXT NOVEMBER IS ELECTION TIME AGAIN. IT WON”T SIMPLY BE A NEW PRESIDENT THAT WE”LL BE ELECTING OR REJECTING. WE’LL ALSO BE VOTING FOR THOSE WE WISH TO HAVE REPRESENTING OUR INTERESTS IN THE LEGISLATURE AS WELL!!! Be alert!

Tag Cloud