Children were being Legally Kidnapped. The Amer children were prized possessions as they would bring top dollar in Medicaid services for being determined by the court as special needs and they became the poster children of the child abuse propaganda industry. All this was done in the name of God because God cannot be audited.
I am very familiar with the Michigan Amer Act and this is why I am going to share my work history on this piece of legislation.
I worked very closely with Representatives John Stahl (R) and Jack Hoogendyk (R), members of the Committee on Children and Family Services. I swing both ways across the aisle. When the Amer Bill was initially introduced, it was filled with a number of constitutional erroneous artifacts which made its original format D.O.A.
The original Amer Bill was crafted to establish religious consideration of placement.
The first issue with religious placements is the fact that, as child welfare is a federally funded program, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. This is taken from the First Amendment of the Constitution. So, what we did was to submit a revised draft to attempt to come into federal compliance with Title IV-E. There had just been a state single audit and it was not pretty, at all.
As a matter of fact, the audit was so bad, pursuant to OMB Cir A-133, the State Auditor General had to report the instances of non-compliance to HHS OIG. Representative Brenda Clack (D) and her buddies wanted to sweep this under the rug.
What came next was the unleashing of financial hell upon Michigan with their Title IV-E compliance. Michigan appealed and lost. So the state had to address the non-compliance which was establishing relative placement provisions in foster care placement. Our bi-partisan solution worked well when presented to Committee and was on fast track for law.
Understanding that the Amers were but only one of a myriad of hell stories of Michigan foster care, (we should never forget the courageous work of Starletta Banks) Representative John Stahl and I began crafting our remedy, House Resolution NN of 2008 which was referred to the House Judiciary Committee. What happened was we presented to U.S. Representative Pete Hoekstra who horribly modified and introduced it as a Parental Rights amendment to the U.S. Constitution, currently going through the ratification process.
I do not support the proposed Parental Rights Amendment and these are the reasons why:
1. Parental Rights do not exist in a form readily understood outside a court of law.
2. There is no codification of "governmental interest" or even "highest order". This would be state interpretation, taking everything back to square one.
3. No one national tenet should have the power to interfere with international engagements.
4. This Amendment is supportive of expanding the scope and powers of Child Protective Services.
I wrote a book on Parental Rights. Of Parental Rights: The Acquisition of Goods. I have given multiple testimony to Congress. I have been engaged with the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General. My authority has yet to be challenged so what I say, I expect to be widely disseminated.
U.S. Representative John Conyers, Jr. will not be addressing a national "Amer Act" and this is why: The law is already on the books. 42 U.S.C. § 671(a)(19)
It is such a shame one of his assistant staffers did not properly vet this issue but that is what Systemsucks do.
What is a System Suck?
The simple answer to this question is this: A system suck is one who profits in one way or another from, or makes their living from the legal kidnapping of your children. There are two types, although both types can be present in one person. One does it for the money, the other does it to make themselves feel important. A sort of self gratification.
Rulemaking in the administration of a state program is left to the States as our government is a federalist structure. That is why there compliance mandates. Authorization of funding is a state judicial determination. Grant compliance of Title IV-E is housed in the venue of the federal executive branch.
The Gentleman and I have been investigating the proper course of action to illuminate the inner workings of the child welfare system. It is not going to be pretty because I am conducting the symphony.
How Federal Legislation Impacts Child Welfare Service Delivery
Thanks, George. Great work!
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©
No comments:
Post a Comment