A fugitive people within a nation is tyranny.

Posts tagged ‘senator’

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


Unemployment: The Plight of Non-Custodial Parents

plight of non-custodial parents

The concept of child support was originally designed to be dynamic and flexible, going up and down as parental income changed. Child Support has become a national battleground for civil rights that is being ignored. You can make a difference.

The Plight of Non-Custodial Parents During Unemployment

on Associated Content.

Archive: Bradley Challenges Child Poverty

“Though he has been an outspoken critic of the sweeping welfare changes enacted by Congress in 1996, his last year in the Senate, Mr. Bradley did not propose rolling back that law’s major provisions, which include time limits on benefits and work requirements for recipients.”

Bill Bradley did not like the changes that the Clinton Administration made in his “pure” law that he and Democrat colleagues made from 1984 through 1991. Democrats worked overtime year by year to modify and recreate family law and welfare before the Clinton swept into office. Apparently, he doesn’t formally object to the enforcement measures that Clinton and the feminists made which violate the civil rights of every American on some level and the civil rights of some Americans on multiple levels. What did the Clintons actually change that made his welfare reform fail or is Bill Bradley simply playing both sides? More likely, he was offended by the Clintons hijacking his personal legal territory. He was running for president at the time, so playing to cover himself is likely. Welfare reform instituted over the years often uses similar tired statistics proposed in this New York Times article along with promises to reduce or eliminate child poverty. The promised results never happen and the welfare and family reform laws usually fails outright on virtually every count. Social engineering through federal tax law rarely works or is kept in place long enough to work. Politics and social engineering has become a large fools game.

Bradley Challenges Nation To Eliminate Child Poverty

Published: October 22, 1999

Describing poverty as a ”slow motion national disaster,” former Senator Bill Bradley called yesterday for reducing the number of poor children by half over the coming decade by raising the minimum wage, increasing spending on child care programs and providing an array of tax benefits to poor parents who work.

Bradley Law Unfairly Punishes Soldiers

updated 5/2010

Fox News Article 3/24/05 Can you believe that this issue continues to be ignored after all this time?

This blog has focused to some degree about the abusive treatment of our brave U.S. soldiers by the Bradley Amendment and Federal Government, even while the Federal Government controls their lives and service to the nation abroad. Soldiers deserve an extra measure of consideration for their service to the nation, whether they are considered as a “perfect member” of society or not. Anyone that thinks otherwise needs to be enrolled in the Armed Forces themselves. Sociopathic behavior on the part of government and family of soldiers toward active soldiers should be inexcusable. There is no excuse for trouble with child support, custody, etc.  when a soldier is serving in the Armed Forces under orders. Soldiers are sitting ducks and easy enough to collect from, even if they are on the other side of the world. The government controls all money and pay, after all, they are in charge. Beyond serving and supporting their efforts, we need to let American soldiers do their job without harassing them, either locally or long-distance!

For those of you that care about military dads, here is a letter of testimony against the harshness of the Bradley Amendment. Whether it is entirely accurate or not is not entirely relevant. The man wrote this letter to his representative as a matter of public record. It may have been removed over the course of time from public view because the Senator is no longer is that position. A soldier wrote a letter; a man pleading for his rights when he believes that he has been abused by the system. This tragedy is nothing new. The fact that a soldier has to be tormented while serving this country and then as he (or she) is getting back on track in a civilian life upon arrival is a sad testimony to the ingrates and sociopaths that we have in this nation.

A soldier’s plead for reform

Senator Pete V. Domenici (R-NM)
6th-term Republican from New Mexico

February 11, 2008

I have faith in the system which I defend. My name is SGT Jason E Bobowski. I have been active military for 8+ years. My problem is the unfair treatment soldiers receive in regard to the child support system in NM. I received my final divorce decree by default through the mail while I was stationed in Soto Cano, Honduras. I had 0 time to prepare for it nor fight the issue my nation called me to go abroad and I went. I know our marriage was a failure lasting a short 3 years which we only spent 9 months together total. We divorced she used a corrupt system to her advantage. She used the courts in Alamogordo where her father works as a social worker in the legal realm. I had no chance of a fair and impartial proceeding. Lies and deceits were used against me in this matter. I have remarried since and been happily together for 5 years. I was young and foolish and now I face hardships in my life because I was unable to represent myself in this matter. Now the child support service has collected my income tax return. I have kept in contact with my Ex and informed her I was receiving letters that the state claimed I owed her a substantial amount of money. The interest was obscenely high and she stated she had contacted the child support services and straightened out this matter. I cannot rely on the truth of that statement. I am deploying again to Iraq in June, so my time in this matter is short. I was born in NM and pay my taxes in NM. I have had opportunities to change my state of residence but I am loyal to our state. The father’s rights in divorce cases is marginal at best, the consensus amongst my fellow soldiers is we get the short end of the stick. In an ever changing world when will the system evolve to be fare and impartial? SGT Bobowski, US Army

La Luz , NM

Constitutional Violations and the Patriotic Man The Constitution and successive Amendments are simply ignored in the name of new legal precedence, feined tolerance and judgment, while little unchecked constitutional violations grow to become a national blight that is considerably more rampant.

Endless Government Expenses & Family Rights Family Rights have been dumbed down to new individual “rights” in an effort to justify individual destructive behaviors so that these behaviors can be mainstreamed.

If Parents Did Their Job… Parent, are you doing your job or are you pointing fingers?

Is Bradley A Men's Issue?

There are plenty of folks out there that think (wrongly) that repealing the Bradley Amendment is a men’s issue. I have had a few outraged people tell me that they take great delight in the fact that “men get what is coming to them“. I didn’t say it. I was told this. Do you feel this way?

You really don’t have to look very far to see that repealing this amendment is a HUMAN issue of great importance. My case in point is a rather touching letter written by a woman to Senator Bill Nelson on February 7.

congress.org website

Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL)
2nd-term Democrat from Florida

Repeal of the Bradley Amendment

Sen. Bill Nelson

February 7, 2008

I am a woman, age 59. I reside in the state of FL, and have most of the time since 1986. Before I came here I allowed my then husband custody of my two youngest daughters. They were age 5 and 7 respectively, and I felt he would be better able to take care of them at the time, as I was quite ill, unemployed, and they needed a stable environment. He was surrounded by non-working female family members who I knew would take better care of them than I was then able. It gave him a support group that I did not have, and I loved my children enough to recognize all this and act in their best interests even though it was the hardest thing I have ever done in my life.. For health reasons I moved to FL. After a year, I was well enough to go back to work. Shortly thereafter my husband filed for divorce and child support was ordered at $350.00 a month (an amount that was based not on my current income, but on what the court felt I was capable of making). I was not financially able to return or represent myself in divorce court. Further, when I had moved out here, we had a verbal agreement that because, in the previous 7 years, I had raised these two and my other 3 children alone, he wouldn’t ask for child support.

After our divorce, the office of support enforcement in the state of WA where he lived with the children started garnishing my wages and did so until 1990. One day I received a letter saying the case was closed because my ex-husband failed to cooperate to collect. I never heard from support enforcement again until 2000 when they informed me I owed $52,000 in back child support. I hired an attorney, and while the amount was reduced to $32,000 for various reasons, I felt that I was denied all kinds of rights. As I said before, I am 59. These children are close to 30, and I am still paying. I worked all those years, never hid from my husband, my children or my obligation, a court order was obviously in place to collect (as for a time they collected), but no one ever acted on it. I therefore was never asked to support my children when they needed it, and now years later I am supporting my ex husband who divorced me over 20 years ago. Because of the Bradley Amendment, I have no recourse under the law to appeal my case, have the amount reduced – nor do I feel I will ever be able to pay it. This law is so unfair and so denies people’s rights to due process. Even murderers can appeal their conviction, get shorter time in prison, be paroled, have their sentences reduced, or even be pardoned altogether. An absent parent who has been determined to owe a custodial parent money can’t do any of these things.

I am an old woman in ill health. I don’t know how to get laws changed, but I beg you, if you have the authority, to please try to get this amendment looked at and either completely rewritten or repealed completely. It is causing so much harm to so many people. What really hurts me the worst about it is that I had these two children plus three more from two other marriages. In twenty years, with open cases, I never received a penny from the first two fathers, and this same father never paid me a penny either for the 7 years he was the absent parent. It seems like all but about 3 years of support here should have been a fair trade off. Now, when I’m old, I’m still the cash cow, the same as I was when I was raising my children. There is simply no justice available to absent parents.

Thank you for your time. I am sending this in the hopes that when you have read it you will search your heart and realize that not everybody caught in this trap was a deadbeat. Some of us are here because we loved our children and tried to do what we thought was right. I still think what I did was right, but by the same token, if I had adopted these girls out to a perfect stranger instead of letting their father raise them, I certainly wouldn’t be in this predicament. I think that fact alone makes clear how wrong this amendment is.

Patricia Harrison
2465 US 1 So., PMB 99
St. Augustine, FL 32086

Tag Cloud