Kleptocracy in Virginia

http://www.washingtontimes.com/comme...4330-4984r.htm

Forum: Kleptocracy in Virginia
January 22, 2006

For the third time in six years, Virginia officials are trying to sneak
through policies that will lead to more broken families and more fatherless
children. They will also result in massive expropriations of Virginians
without due process of law and the jailing of more law-abiding parents. As
always in the post-Clinton era, the cynical justification is "the children,"
but those who profit will be lawyers, judges and bureaucrats.
Yet another rigged government panel is groping for any justification to
railroad through higher child support, though it already is at punitive
levels. Under current guidelines, a father clearing $2,100 monthly, pays
$1,137.50 and lives on less than $1,000. Add-ons for health insurance can
easily bring it to $2,000. This is how Virginia officials subsidize divorce,
plunder fathers and create instant criminals out of law-abiding citizens.
Twice their efforts failed when the chicanery was exposed in this
newspaper in 1999 and 2001. Now Richard Byrd, a divorce lawyer, has devised
a new excuse: Child support must be increased because of inflation. Never
mind that child support adjusts automatically for inflation because it
increases with income. This is like saying taxes must be raised due to
inflation.
Mr. Byrd hopes to tie child support to the Consumer Price Index, based
largely on adult consumption of adult clothing, tobacco, alcohol, taxes and
the like. His proposal is an admission child support is not really for
children but more for the enrichment of grown-ups. Officials are in open
violation of federal law, plus Section 20-108.2 of the state domestic
relations code and Senate Joint Resolution 192 specifically requiring them
to examine "the costs of raising children in Virginia." Officials claim that
study "would cost millions" and have never done it, despite receiving
federal funds to do so.
So government officials refuse to obey the law with the plea it would
cost too much, when it is for precisely this reason they are jailing parents
without trial: failure to obey the law -- capricious court orders -- because
they cannot afford to do so.
The self-serving economics of child support has been harshly criticized
by scholars. Yet the panel only consults "experts" who urge increases. They
ignore scholars like Bryce Christensen, who notes "evidence of the linkage
between aggressive child-support policies and the erosion of wedlock," and
who writes in Society that "the advocates of ever-more-aggressive measures
for collecting child support ... have moved us a dangerous step closer to a
police state."
They ignore Kimberly Folse and Hugo Varela-Alvarez, who conclude
child-support programs "lead to the unintended consequence of increasing the
likelihood of divorce." The panel took no notice of W.S. Comanor's
groundbreaking volume, "The Law and Economics of Child Support Payments,"
where leading scholars characterize the system as "an obvious sham," a
"disaster," and "the most onerous form of debt collection practiced in the
United States." Citizens who want to redress the balance with these less
biased experts must pay for it out of their own pockets.
No public outcry has ever demanded that officials act on child support;
the initiative throughout has come entirely from government officials, who
indeed exhibit open contempt for the public. Though they promised a two-hour
public hearing, officials adjourned it after only 50 minutes. Citizens were
given 4 minutes to express their views. One gentleman was cut off as he
tried to refute the panel's distorted economics.
Rigging the democratic process has become standard procedure in Virginia
child support politics. Like previous panels, this one is stacked with
divorce operatives. Every panel member but two has a pecuniary interest in
higher awards and more divorce.
Yet even this meager representation is gagged. In 2001, I was removed
from the panel when an in an article in this newspaper I pointed out similar
biases. Officials made no attempt to disguise the fact the "opinions
published in the June 17, 2001, Washington Times" were the reason. The
then-Secretary of Health and Human Resources wrote: "I find it difficult to
see how you could effectively participate along with representatives of
other groups that very likely have different perspectives than yours." Yet
the panel was required by law to include members with different viewpoints.
Since all other panel members had a vested interest in higher child-support
burdens, a willingness to increase child-support effectively became a
requirement for serving on the panel.
Other former members, Barry Koplen and Murray Steinberg, have charged
the panel's procedures were rigged. No economist serves on Virginia's panel,
an odd omission if the purpose is to determine child-rearing costs.
Meanwhile, enforcement agents stand poised to move in on parents who,
quite predictably, will be unable to pay the increased burdens. Last fall,
officials published newspaper advertisements declaring guilty private
citizens tried for no crime and who have no similar platform to defend
themselves.

Even the FBI, on its Ten Most Wanted Fugitives list, provides "allegations."
But Virginia's "Ten Most Wanted" child-support list simply proclaims guilt
(as a group) without trial.
The child support machine is a regime of breathtaking cynicism --
forcibly removing children from their parents and then claiming the parents
have "abandoned" them. It is mind-boggling that we allow our children to be
exploited to justify such crimes against the Constitution.

STEPHEN BASKERVILLE
Member of the 2001 Virginia Child Support Guideline Review Panel and
current president of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children.

STEPHEN BASKERVILLE
Member of the 2001 Virginia Child Support Guideline Review Panel and
current president of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children.


Another excellent indictment of the C$ system by Baskerville. He is my
hero.

"JayR" wrote in message
...

STEPHEN BASKERVILLE
Member of the 2001 Virginia Child Support Guideline Review Panel and
current president of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children.

Another excellent indictment of the C$ system by Baskerville. He is my
hero.

Yupper! Baskerville, Usher, Sacks, Parker and a few others are fast
becoming my personal favs for sure. I have a personal preference for people
that fire from the hip, don't flinch, and can take it (as well as dish it
out). There are far too few that can tell the truth, in all it's gory,
unadulterated, un-PC glory and make you think.

"Dusty" wrote in message
...
http://www.washingtontimes.com/comme...4330-4984r.htm

Forum: Kleptocracy in Virginia
January 22, 2006

For the third time in six years, Virginia officials are trying to sneak
through policies that will lead to more broken families and more
fatherless
children. They will also result in massive expropriations of Virginians
without due process of law and the jailing of more law-abiding parents. As
always in the post-Clinton era, the cynical justification is "the
children,"
but those who profit will be lawyers, judges and bureaucrats.
Yet another rigged government panel is groping for any justification
to
railroad through higher child support, though it already is at punitive
levels. Under current guidelines, a father clearing $2,100 monthly, pays
$1,137.50 and lives on less than $1,000. Add-ons for health insurance can
easily bring it to $2,000. This is how Virginia officials subsidize
divorce,
plunder fathers and create instant criminals out of law-abiding citizens.
Twice their efforts failed when the chicanery was exposed in this
newspaper in 1999 and 2001. Now Richard Byrd, a divorce lawyer, has
devised
a new excuse: Child support must be increased because of inflation. Never
mind that child support adjusts automatically for inflation because it
increases with income. This is like saying taxes must be raised due to
inflation.

And some governments actually do that. LOL

Mr. Byrd hopes to tie child support to the Consumer Price Index, based
largely on adult consumption of adult clothing, tobacco, alcohol, taxes
and
the like. His proposal is an admission child support is not really for
children but more for the enrichment of grown-ups. Officials are in open
violation of federal law, plus Section 20-108.2 of the state domestic
relations code and Senate Joint Resolution 192 specifically requiring them
to examine "the costs of raising children in Virginia." Officials claim
that
study "would cost millions" and have never done it, despite receiving
federal funds to do so.
So government officials refuse to obey the law with the plea it would
cost too much, when it is for precisely this reason they are jailing
parents
without trial: failure to obey the law -- capricious court orders --
because
they cannot afford to do so.
The self-serving economics of child support has been harshly
criticized
by scholars. Yet the panel only consults "experts" who urge increases.
They
ignore scholars like Bryce Christensen, who notes "evidence of the linkage
between aggressive child-support policies and the erosion of wedlock," and
who writes in Society that "the advocates of ever-more-aggressive measures
for collecting child support ... have moved us a dangerous step closer to
a
police state."
They ignore Kimberly Folse and Hugo Varela-Alvarez, who conclude
child-support programs "lead to the unintended consequence of increasing
the
likelihood of divorce." The panel took no notice of W.S. Comanor's
groundbreaking volume, "The Law and Economics of Child Support Payments,"
where leading scholars characterize the system as "an obvious sham," a
"disaster," and "the most onerous form of debt collection practiced in the
United States." Citizens who want to redress the balance with these less
biased experts must pay for it out of their own pockets.
No public outcry has ever demanded that officials act on child
support;
the initiative throughout has come entirely from government officials, who
indeed exhibit open contempt for the public. Though they promised a
two-hour
public hearing, officials adjourned it after only 50 minutes. Citizens
were
given 4 minutes to express their views. One gentleman was cut off as he
tried to refute the panel's distorted economics.
Rigging the democratic process has become standard procedure in
Virginia
child support politics. Like previous panels, this one is stacked with
divorce operatives. Every panel member but two has a pecuniary interest in
higher awards and more divorce.
Yet even this meager representation is gagged. In 2001, I was removed
from the panel when an in an article in this newspaper I pointed out
similar
biases. Officials made no attempt to disguise the fact the "opinions
published in the June 17, 2001, Washington Times" were the reason. The
then-Secretary of Health and Human Resources wrote: "I find it difficult
to
see how you could effectively participate along with representatives of
other groups that very likely have different perspectives than yours." Yet
the panel was required by law to include members with different
viewpoints.
Since all other panel members had a vested interest in higher
child-support
burdens, a willingness to increase child-support effectively became a
requirement for serving on the panel.
Other former members, Barry Koplen and Murray Steinberg, have charged
the panel's procedures were rigged. No economist serves on Virginia's
panel,
an odd omission if the purpose is to determine child-rearing costs.
Meanwhile, enforcement agents stand poised to move in on parents who,
quite predictably, will be unable to pay the increased burdens. Last fall,
officials published newspaper advertisements declaring guilty private
citizens tried for no crime and who have no similar platform to defend
themselves.

Even the FBI, on its Ten Most Wanted Fugitives list, provides
"allegations."
But Virginia's "Ten Most Wanted" child-support list simply proclaims guilt
(as a group) without trial.

http://www.independent.org/pdf/tir/t...askerville.pdf says it all.

The child support machine is a regime of breathtaking cynicism --
forcibly removing children from their parents and then claiming the
parents
have "abandoned" them. It is mind-boggling that we allow our children to
be
exploited to justify such crimes against the Constitution.

The government fools running this corrupt system are a product of the hippie
generation. Is anyone surprised?


STEPHEN BASKERVILLE
Member of the 2001 Virginia Child Support Guideline Review Panel and
current president of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children.

No why doesn't one of the investigative reporter types do an expose on
this ****?

wrote in message
oups.com...
No why doesn't one of the investigative reporter types do an expose on
this ****?

Because to write about the destruction of the family and the vilification of
men is not considered news. Nor is men being abused by their wives,
girlfriends, the courts and/or the Federal/state governments considered news
worthy either.

Unless a man has committed a heinous act (rape, murder beating, theft,
etc..), it's not news. Unless a woman is killed, raped or beaten (by a
man/men/boy/boys), then there's nothing to write about.