Friday, March 24, 2017

Day 152 - Hillary's Hackers, Awan Brothers Saga Deepens

Following Up on Chicago Sun Times 2014 Fraud Article Against Gulen Concept Schools

Enter the NGA, the NSA From the Sky
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Thursday, March 23, 2017

Day 151 - Hillary's Hackers, Awan Brothers Saga Deepens


Collect It All - McCabe Can Order Electronic or Physical Surveillance Any Time Without Warrant. You Only Need FISA If You Are Going Public Or To Trial



Managing David Bluhm Organ Donors and Casino Money Cleaner With Physical Surveillance.

Neil Bluhm Fresh Hearts From Homan Square

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS, GOODLATTE, GRASSLEY, FEINSTEIN, LEAHY Call for Quick Action on Legislation to Provide Selection Process for Register of Copyrights


Makes Register a Presidential Appointment with Senate Confirmation 

Washington, D.C. -- House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) and Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)  today introduced the Register of Copyrights Selection and Accountability Act, which is the product of months of bicameral, bipartisan discussions led by Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.), Chairman Goodlatte, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Ranking Member Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), and Senate Judiciary Committee Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.).

The Register of Copyrights Selection and Accountability Act makes important changes to the selection process for the head of the U.S. Copyright Office, known as the Register of Copyrights.  Specifically, the legislation requires the Register to be nominated by the President of the United States and subject to confirmation by the U.S. Senate.  It would also limit the Register to a ten year term which is renewable by another Presidential nomination and Senate confirmation.

Chairman Goodlatte, Ranking Member Conyers, Chairman Grassley, Ranking Member Feinstein, and Senator Leahy released the following joint statement upon introduction of the Register of Copyrights Selection and Accountability Act.

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.
“We are pleased to join together in a bipartisan, bicameral effort to make important and necessary improvements to the selection process for the position of Register of Copyrights. We remain absolutely committed to working on modernizing the Copyright Office. Reforms being considered include public advisory committees, improvements to Copyright Office systems for data inputs and outputs, and copyright ownership transparency.  However, time is of the essence when it comes to the selection process for a new Register of Copyrights.

“America’s creativity is the envy of the world and the Copyright Office is at the center of it.  With the current Register serving only on an acting basis, now is the time to make changes to ensure that future Registers are transparent and accountable to Congress.  We must ensure that any new Register is a good manager and fully qualified to lead and make this office more operationally effective as he or she continues to directly advise Congress on copyrights. The next Register of Copyrights should be dedicated to serving all stakeholders in the copyright ecosystem.”  

The Register of Copyrights Selection and Accountability Act was introduced with twenty-nine bipartisan cosponsors.

Background:  As part of the copyright review, the House Judiciary Committee held 20 hearings which included testimony from 100 witnesses.  Following these hearings, Chairman Goodlatte and Ranking Member Conyers invited all prior witnesses of the Committee’s copyright review hearings and other interested stakeholders to meet with Committee staff and provide additional input on copyright policy issues.  In addition, the House Judiciary Committee conducted a listening tour with stops in Nashville, Silicon Valley, and Los Angeles where they heard from a wide range of creators, innovators, technology professionals, and users of copyrighted works. In December 2016, Chairman Goodlatte and Ranking Member Conyers released the first policy proposal to come out of the Committee’s review of U.S. Copyright law.  Additional policy proposals will be released.
Original Cosponsors:

Karen Bass (D- Calif.) Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) Ken Buck (R-Colo.) Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) Judy Chu (D-Calif.) David Cicilline (D-R.I.) Doug Collins (R-Ga.) Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) Ted Deutch (D-Fla.) Blake Farethold (R-Texas) Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) Hank Johnson, Jr. (D-Ga.) Mike Johnson (R-La.) Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) Steve King (R-Iowa) Raul Labrador (R-Idaho) Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) Tom Marino (R-Penn.) Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) Ted Poe (R-Texas) John Ratcliffe (R-Texas) Martha Roby (R-Ala.) Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wisc.) Lamar Smith (R-Texas)


Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS: Chairman Nunes Should Be Disqualified


It Is Past Time for an Independent Investigation into Russia and the Trump Campaign

Washington, D.C. – Yesterday, Chairman Devin Nunes of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence told reporters that, “on numerous occasions, the intelligence community incidentally collected information about U.S. citizens involved in the Trump transition.”  Chairman Nunes then traveled to the White House to share his findings with President Donald Trump.  FBI Director James Comey recently confirmed that President Trump and his associates are the subject of an ongoing counterintelligence investigation. Later in the evening, CNN reported that the FBI may be in possession of evidence that indicates direct collusion between President Trump’s team and Russian officials, possibly to coordinate the release of information damaging to Hillary Clinton’s campaign. 

House Committee on the Judiciary Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. released the following statement in response to these developments:

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.
“An after-the-fact apology is not enough. With his reckless behavior, Chairman Nunes has disqualified himself to lead any legitimate investigation into the actions of the Trump campaign.  Despite what evidence he may have, he is not entitled to share that information with President Trump before briefing his colleagues on the intelligence committee.  President Trump is the potential target of an ongoing federal investigation.  This is more than a breach of protocol – it is a direct threat to the work of the FBI.

“The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee cannot be a surrogate of the White House.  At a minimum, this investigation must be taken out of Chairman Nunes’ hands.

“If indeed the FBI has evidence of collusion or communication between President Trump and the Russian government, then we can wait no longer.  It is past time for Congress to establish a bipartisan, independent panel to uncover the full scope of the President’s allegedly treasonous actions.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS At Capitol In Opposition To "Wealth Care" Bill


Image may contain: 6 people, people smiling, people standing, crowd and outdoorYesterday, I joined my colleagues and former VP Joe Biden in front of the Capitol in opposition to the Republican healthcare bill that I like to call "Wealth Care".

Despite all the wrong that this bill does and opposition from both Democrats and Republicans, Trump and Ryan are continuing to try to bully Republicans into passing this bill. We can't afford to have millions of Americans lose their health insurance.


                  #WealthCare



   


Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Michigan Daire Rendon Includes "The Poors" In Public Meetings

Without further adieu, I would like to honor Michigan House Representative Daire Rendon (formerly know as LMHM) for her greatest political lifetime achievement, by recognizing this monumental moment of her participation in the concept of open democracy to ameliorate the pervasive situation of childhood poverty in the State of Michigan and to allow the public recording through testimony, of the pandemic patterns of practice with fraud, waste, abuse, and human trafficking through publicly funded child welfare, privatized programs.

via GIPHY

Within an hour of the March 23, 2017 Public Meeting of the Michigan House Standing Committee on Families, Children & Seniors, Daire Rendon, has, for the first time in the history of her legislative tenure as the Chair, successfully executed her duties of public office, in the capacity of a public servant, by publishing public notice of the next scheduled meeting, more than 22 hours, in advance.

Ladies and Gentlemen, we have ourselves an open meeting, devoid of another skirting in legal semantics of the Open Meetings Act's 18 hour rule.

This is to mean that the primary stakeholders, "The Poors", will have opportunity to submit into the public record, well in advance of the meeting, for the secondary stakeholders, the privatized contractors, state administrators, fellow committee members, and federal oversight authorities, to prepare, review, and simply vet, the matters on the agenda, for the purposes of engaging in logical and ethical discussions to improve the delivery and quality of services, in the most expedient and efficient manner for improvements in the quality of life and the posterity of the state, to about 50% of the state residents, mainly children in poverty.

Madam Chair, welcome to the world of public rulemaking.

I look forward to working with you and your Committee.

Standing Committee Meeting

Families, Children, and Seniors, Rep. Daire Rendon, Chair

DATE: Thursday, March 30, 2017

TIME: 10:30 AM

PLACE: Room 327, House Office Building, Lansing, MI

AGENDA:
Presentation regarding an in-house program with the Washtenaw County Sherriff’s office for behavioral healthcare of inmates.

Speaking on the issue is:

Derrick Jackson, MSW
Director of Community Engagement
Washtenaw County Sheriff Office

and

Allan Wachendorfer, LMSW - Macro
Director of Public Policy
National Association of Social Workers - Michigan

OR ANY BUSINESS PROPERLY BEFORE THIS COMMITTEE

To view text of legislation go to:
 http://www.legislature.mi.gov/mileg.aspx?page=CommitteeBillRecord
517-373-7256
e-Mail: tthrush@house.mi.gov

Individuals needing special accommodations to participate in the meeting may contact the Chair's office.

Schedule changes or cancellations available at http://www.house.mi.gov/publiccommitteeschedule/

Notice posted: 3/23/2017 at 12:12 p.m.

Yellen says problems of childhood poverty linger

A new Federal Reserve survey has found that children who grew up in poverty were twice as likely to struggle with financial challenges later in life, Fed Chair Janet Yellen said Thursday.

The survey showed that more than half of young people age 25 to 39 who reported that as children they worried over things like having enough food were currently facing financial challenges, Yellen said. That was double the number with financial troubles who did not face such concerns as children.
Yellen told a Fed conference on community development that the findings underscored the need to provide children with the resources they need to achieve financial success later in life.

In her speech, Yellen made no comments on the current state of the economy or interest rates.
In the survey, which the Fed will publish later this spring, Yellen said there was a clear connection between childhood struggles and financial problems later in life.

"Young adults who regularly or sometimes worried when they were children about care, safety or having enough to eat are also less likely to be employed, less likely to have consistent income month-to-month and less likely to pay all of their current monthly bills in full, compared with those who never or rarely worried about these concerns as children," Yellen said.

Yellen said the research to be presented at the Fed's two-day conference made a compelling case for the need to prepare people starting at an early age for success in the labor market.

"This research underscores the value of starting young to develop basic work habits and skills," she said. "These habits and skills help prepare people for work, help them enter the labor market sooner, meet with more success over time and be in a position to develop the more specialized skills and obtain the academic credentials that are strongly correlated with higher and steadier earnings."

Yellen said a growing body of research showed that greater success was being achieved by addressing workforce development in early childhood education compared to spending on job training later in life.

"Ensuring that all of our kids have 'strong foundations' will help build a similarly strong foundation for the U.S. economy," Yellen said.

(Will update once I have found the Federal Reserve Survey cited in this article.)

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Wednesday, March 22, 2017

CONYERS: Our Water Infrastructure Deficit is the Real Crisis


Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.
Politicians nationwide are neglecting one of the most pressing challenges of our generation: an unprecedented and ever-increasing deficit. If left unchecked, it will only grow in severity and continue to saddle our children and grandchildren with its devastating effects. It is a deficit that can only be addressed with decisive action from our nation’s leaders.

I am not talking about mere fiscal shortfalls, which can easily be corrected through fair tax policies. I am referring to America’s $697 billion water infrastructure deficit. On World Water Day, we must commit our nation to fulfilling the basic promise of universal access to clean water.

In 1972, Congress passed the Clean Water Act, affirming our government’s commitment to ensuring access to clean water for all Americans. But over the past four decades, Congress failed to fulfill this promise. Funding for water infrastructure peaked in 1977, but fell by 74% in real dollars by 2014. At its zenith the federal government spent $76.27 per person (in 2014 dollars) on water services. By 2014 that number was just $13.68 per person. The sustained lack of funding for water services has led to an aging infrastructure that, according to the latest EPA reports, will require $697 billion in repairs over the next twenty years. In contrast, US defense spending nearly doubled over the same time span to over $700 billion a year, including funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and President Trump says we can afford an additional $54 billion a year in military spending. It is time we acknowledge that a modern, safe drinking and wastewater system is at least as important to American national security as bombs and bullets.

Tragically, the State of Michigan already experienced firsthand the horror of what can happen when aging infrastructure meets the ideology of austerity. Decisions made by the state-appointed officials in Flint resulted in a public health crisis leaving tens of thousands of children exposed to dangerously high levels of lead. Many of the victims will suffer from lifelong impairments because of this exposure.

But the tragedy in Flint is not an anomaly. It is not an isolated incident that merits our thoughts and prayers but little action or accountability. Reports of lead levels in Detroit Public Schools of 100 times the allowable limit caused the Detroit Department of Health to call for lead screening for all students under the age of 6. Flint was a warning sign, a harbinger of a future with a crumbling water infrastructure, a future that looks increasingly like our present situation. Even in the halls of Congress, hundreds of offices lost access to tap water last year due to elevated levels of lead. Without federal funding, the crisis in Flint could very well become the norm across the nation. With over 11,000 community water systems utilizing 6 million lead service pipelines, the risk of another Flint is far too high.

That is why today I am reintroducing an overdue piece of legislation, “The Water Affordability, Transparency, Equity and Reliability (WATER) Act,” which is co-sponsored by 18 members of Congress and supported by over 60 national and grassroots organizations.

The WATER Act will issue grants to ensure homeowners’ service lines that may contain lead are replaced. Our water infrastructure problems extend far beyond lead pipes, however. Over one million miles of piping beneath our streets and homes, a century and a half worth of cast iron, copper, and even wooden vessels, are nearing the end of their lives. The American Water Works Association warns that leaving our decaying infrastructure unchecked will result in “degrading water service, increasing water service disruptions, and increasing expenditures for emergency repairs.” A modern water system may be a challenge for many developing countries – it should not be for the wealthiest nation on the planet.

To directly address the lead found in water at public schools in Detroit and across the country, the WATER Act provides funding to public schools for testing, repairing, replacing, or installing the necessary infrastructure for drinking water. Our children should not endanger their long-term health at the water fountain between classes.

The WATER Act’s $35 billion annual expenditure will be paid for by needed changes to our corporate tax code. The act ends the income tax deferral for offshore corporate profits, a move expected to generate over $60 billion annually. The $35 billion for repairing and replacing our infrastructure will create around one million new jobs here in America—jobs that cannot be outsourced to other countries. I further included Buy America provisions to ensure that the materials used are produced right here, and have indicated that union labor must be given a priority in the construction contracts, so that jobs created by my bill will be family-supporting jobs.

The WATER Act is a win-win-win for the American people. We will no longer feel anxious as we pour our children a glass of water, wondering if it is clean and safe. We will ensure corporations pay their fair share of taxes. And we will put hundreds of thousands of Americans back to work modernizing American infrastructure. Congress should give Americans something to drink to, and pass my WATER Act without delay.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS Statement on H.R. 1393, the "Mobile Workforce State Income Tax Simplification Act of 2017"


Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.
H.R. 1393, the “Mobile Workforce State Income Tax Simplification Act,” helps to clarify various record-keeping and state income tax liability issues.  Nevertheless, the bill requires further revision before I can support it.

On the positive side, H.R. 1393 attempts to solve a legitimate problem presented by employee tax liability and employer withholding requirements.

Many employers are subject to multiple tax compliance record-keeping requirements for their mobile workers. 

These workers, in turn, are often subject to potentially conflicting and thereby confusing multiple state income tax requirements.

The paperwork that both employers and workers must file can be complicated and time-consuming.

And the filings, especially for sometimes miniscule amounts of income, can even be burdensome to state revenue departments.

Unfortunately, H.R. 1393, if enacted, could result in some states losing millions of dollars in revenue.

In fact, New York could lose upwards of $100 million in revenue.

Fortunately, this legislation only needs some simple changes to eliminate these negative impacts. 

For example, the bill currently has a 30-day threshold before an employee would be required to pay income taxes in a state. A much lower threshold would be fairer to the states and still provide certainty to employers and employees.

In addition, the bill’s timekeeping requirements could be tightened to help prevent tax avoidance.

A solution appears to potentially close and, accordingly, I look forward to working with my colleagues and the various stakeholders to finally achieve this goal.

I would be remiss if I did not take this opportunity to urge my colleagues to pass a fair and uniform framework to allow states to collect taxes owed on remote sales, rather than proceed with this flawed bill.

By staying silent since the Supreme Court’s 1992 Quill decision, Congress has failed to ensure that states have the authority to collect the sales and use tax on internet purchases.

While this decision may have made sense in 1992, it does not stand up well over time. In 2015 alone $26 billion dollars owed to states went uncollected.

Lost tax revenues mean that state and local governments will have fewer resources to provide their residents essential services, such as education and health care.

This Congress, House Republicans are advancing both TrumpCare and a disastrous budget that would both cut untold amounts of federal assistance to the states.

In light of these looming funding cuts, the loss of billions of dollars in state revenue is more pressing than ever.  This committee should move swiftly to close the internet tax loophole by passing legislation this Congress.

I thank the Chairman and yield back the balance of my time.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

On World Water Day, Conyers Reintroduces Bill To Address Nation's Water Infrastructure Crisis


Washington, D.C. — Congressman John Conyers, Jr. (MI-13) today reintroduced the Water Affordability, Transparency, Equity and Reliability(WATER) Act. This legislation would provide nearly $35 billion annually to modernize U.S. water infrastructure. The WATER Act funds infrastructure projects by closing a loophole on offshore corporate profits. The WATER Act would make these profits subject to U.S. tax in the year they are generated and ensure that all funds would go to publicly-owned water systems, rather than for-profit providers.

Dean of the U.S.House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.
“Today, we mark World Water Day 2017—where we focus on how important this fundamental resource is to life itself. Around the world, people struggle with access to safe, affordable water—sadly America is no different. Thousands of communities depend on water pipes that are a century old, unsafe, and need to be replaced,” Congressman Conyers said. “That is why I’m introducing the WATER Act of 2017, which funds a massive investment in our public water utilities and creates thousands of jobs in every community. It would help places like Flint, where lead has made the water undrinkable—or Detroit, where outdated infrastructure makes water unaffordable. In the richest country in the world—safe, affordable water in every home is a basic human right.  The WATER Act would make that principle a reality for every American.”

More than 11,200 community water systems have lead service lines, some of which provide water to schools. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates roughly $697 billion is needed to upgrade our drinking water and wastewater systems over the next 20 years.  Without adequate federal support, communities often have to compensate for the funding gap by raising service rates, which some households cannot afford, leading some—including thousands of Detroiters—to be cut off from water and sewer service. Current failing service lines pose a danger to the environment, and wastewater overflows threaten public health. Congressman Conyers introduced the WATER Act to help ensure access to safe, clean, affordable water service. The bill reintroduction comes a day after reports indicated that nearly 380,000 Michigan residents get their water from systems that would fail to meet lead-safety standards proposed by Michigan Governor Rick Snyder.

The WATER Act would allow states to issue grants to replace lead service lines and would establish a School Drinking Water Improvement Grant program to provide funding to public primary and secondary schools that wish to test, repair, replace or install the infrastructure necessary for drinking water foundations or bottle filling stations. Additionally, the WATER Act creates a new grant program to help households install, repair, replace and upgrade septic tanks and drainage fields. The legislation also amends the existing Tribal grant program to increase the amount of assistance from 1.5 percent of Drinking Water SRF funds to 3 percent.

The legislation is cosponsored by Reps. Cheri Bustos (IL-17), Yvette Clarke (NY-09), Keith Ellison (MN-05), Dwight Evans (PA-02), Tulsi Gabbard (HI-02), Raúl Grijalva (AZ-03), Jared Huffman (CA-02), Sheila Jackson Lee (TX-18), Pramila Jayapal (WA-07), Hank Johnson (GA-04), Brenda Lawrence (MI-14), Michelle Lujan Grisham (NM-01), Betty McCollum (MN-04), James McGovern (MA-02), Gwen Moore (WI-04), Jerrold Nadler (NY-10), Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC), Mark Pocan (WI-02), Jamie Raskin (MD-08), Jan Schakowsky (IL-09), Peter Welch (VT-At Large). It is endorsed by over 60 labor unions, national and grassroots organizations, including:  Food & Water Watch, Public Citizen, AFSCME, UAW, National Nurses United, 9to5, National Association of Working Women, Alliance for Democracy, Center for Biological Diversity, Corporate Accountability International, Hip Hop Caucus, Michigan Unitarian Universalist Social Justice Network, United Church of Christ, Detroit Metropolitan Association Social Justice Mission Team, Michigan United, Water You Fighting For, We the People of Detroit.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

"Lil Miss Hot Mess" Daire Rendon Disenfranchises Michigan, Again!

Lil Miss Hot Mess Daire Rendon,
Michigan House Chair for the
Standing Committee on
Families, Children & Seniors



"Lil Miss Hot Mess" Daire Rendon  [(a.k.a. LMHM) a term of endearment from folks who work with her] has done it again.

With about 239 minutes to spare, LMHM has posted the public notice of an open meeting, 3 hours and 59 minutes past the 18th hour mark of the statute.

But, wait, the best part is that the meeting is about Medicaid, my field of expertise (fraud, waste and abuse) for this committee, but, alas, I am unable to attend, due to the fact that, again, I do not have enough advanced notice to make arrangements for an entire crew of Michigan stakeholders (a.k.a. "The Poors") who wish to, also, share their subject matter expertise.

It is such a shame the minutes of the previous meeting were never published, again.

I wonder if there is some kind of policy, training program, or investigative entity, that would be so kind to engage LMHM in the ways of running a committee.

Perhaps, the committee would like to contract with me to provide, in depth, instruction on the administration of government, well, we will strictly focus on being the committee chair for the law and policies of the largest section of the state's budget.

So, until LMHM Rendon figures out that she cannot disenfranchise the people from public participation of the Legislature, I am going to continue to advocate for democracy, a public concept which seems to sincerely elude LMHM.

This was posted March 22, 2017 at 1:29 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, via email.

Standing Committee Meeting

Families, Children, and Seniors, Rep. Daire Rendon, Chair

DATE: Thursday, March 23, 2017

TIME: 10:30 AM

PLACE: Room 327, House Office Building, Lansing, MI

AGENDA:
Presentation from Deputy Director of the Department of Health and Human Services Medical Services Administration

HB 4180 (Rep. Neeley)   Family law; domestic violence; reference to family independence agency in a certain act; revise to department of health and human services.

OR ANY BUSINESS PROPERLY BEFORE THIS COMMITTEE

To view text of legislation go to:
 http://www.legislature.mi.gov/mileg.aspx?page=CommitteeBillRecord

Committee Clerk: Taylor Thrush
Phone: 517-373-7256
e-Mail: tthrush@house.mi.gov

Individuals needing special accommodations to participate in the meeting may contact the Chair's office.

Schedule changes or cancellations available at http://www.house.mi.gov/publiccommitteeschedule/

Notice posted: 3/22/2017  <=== Seriously.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Day 150 - Hillary's Hackers, Awan Brothers Saga Deepens

Faye Turnbull, RT UK Promoted Our Series To @_chrismacguire at RT Dublin

Concept School HQ Next To A Casino? In A Casino?

USDA and FAA Very close to Concept Scoops HQ

Organ Harvesting BRC Directly Across From Rosemont Casino

USDA, FAA, Concept Schools, Casinos, Organ Harvesting, All Together In Hillary's Back Yard, Oh Yeah, Pakistani Mangos

Nunes Cites "Dozens and Dozens" of Surveillance Taskings , At Least Two Whistleblowers More Now


More Muhammed Shah Photos - Iwan Brothers Facebook Likes

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS: For Once, I Agree With Governor Snyder!


Washington, D.C. – Today, Michigan Governor Rick Snyder sent a letter to the entire Michigan Congressional Delegation informing them of his opposition to the American Health Care Act, the House Speaker Paul Ryan and President Donald Trump backed plan to sharply cut Medicaid and reduce taxes for the wealthiest Americans. In his letter, Governor Snyder points out that the bill “shifts significant financial risk and cost from the federal government to states without providing sufficient flexibility to manage this additional responsibility,” and that it “reduces federal resources that our state relies on to assist 2.4 million Michiganders enrolled in traditional Medicaid and the Healthy Michigan Plan …”

In response, Congressman John Conyers, Jr. (MI-13) released the following statement:

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers Jr.
“For once, I agree with Governor Snyder’s views on the Republican healthcare bill — or as I call it, wealth care bill. As Snyder points out, about half of all children in Michigan are served by Medicaid, and those children will suffer if Donald Trump and Paul Ryan pass this massive tax cut for the wealthy.

“The bill is a massive transfer of wealth that takes money from those most in need and gives it to the rich. Under this bill, the 400 wealthiest families in America get a tax break worth $7 million per year. The bill undoes protections that the Affordable Care Act provides by allowing insurance companies to discriminate against cancer survivors or people with disabilities by charging them higher rates, or denying them coverage altogether. This Trump/Ryan backed bill also allows insurance companies to charge seniors five times more than what others pay for the same plan.

“Governor Snyder is right to be concerned about the additional costs this bad bill will shift to the state of Michigan. Because I believe that healthcare is a right for all, not a privilege for those who can afford it, I have long championed a single-payer, Medicare-for-All approach to healthcare that would finally establish truly universal care. If Governor Snyder is serious about reducing the strain on state resources, I call on him to join me in supporting Medicare-for-All, which would virtually eliminate state spending to subsidize care.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS Floor Statement for H.R. 372, the “Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act of 2017"

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.
Although I rise in qualified support of H.R. 372, the “Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act of 2017,” I do not endorse the Majority’s exaggerated claims regarding the bill’s impact on the affordability and availability of health insurance.

H.R. 372 would partially repeal the limited Federal antitrust exemption for the business of insurance established by the McCarran-Ferguson Act in 1945. 

Specifically, the bill only permits Federal antitrust enforcement with regard to the business of health insurance.

House Democrats have long supported a full repeal of McCarran-Ferguson’s antitrust exemption for all insurers, not just for health insurers.

And, in 2010, under a Democratic House Majority, we passed legislation to repeal the McCarran-Ferguson exemption for health insurers by a vote of 406 to 19, even though House Republicans had not previously supported moving any version of a McCarran-Ferguson repeal bill.

But let me be clear.  Enacting H.R. 372 would in no way be a substitute for the many health insurance guarantees of the Affordable Care Act.

To begin with, enacting H.R. 372 would not significantly improve health care affordability or coverage.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, H.R. 372’s effect on health insurance premiums “would probably be quite small,” and enacting the bill will have “no significant net effect on the premiums that private insurers would charge for health or dental insurance.”

And, Consumers Union observes that the application of the antitrust laws to some health insurance activity, by itself, is simply not enough to create a vibrant insurance market because our “long experience shows you can’t expect a health care system to run effectively on competition alone.”

Likewise, the Majority’s claim that enacting H.R. 372 would create major new competition by allowing cross-state insurance sales is unavailing.

Current law, including the Affordable Care Act, already allows states to agree with each other to allow cross-state insurance sales.

Enabling Federal antitrust agencies to police certain forms of anticompetitive conduct will not, in and of itself, incentivize health insurers to offer products across state lines beyond the incentives that already exist for offering such products.

Whatever the incentives for health insurers to offer such products, they have little to do with Federal antitrust law or enforcement.

Finally, enacting H.R. 372 would not ensure that the Affordable Care Act’s prohibitions against discrimination and limits on premium growth would remain in place.

H.R. 372 only applies to certain anticompetitive conduct and does not preserve or enhance existing protections for consumers of health insurance.

For instance, it does not prohibit discrimination by health insurers on the basis of preexisting conditions.  Nor does it reduce premium growth or require health insurers to be accountable for price increases.

Repeal of the antitrust exemption for health insurance is a complement to, not a replacement for, the Affordable Care Act’s many consumer protections.

This is not an “either/or” situation.  We need H.R. 372 and the Affordable Care Act to be in place to maximize benefits, improve quality, and lower costs for consumers.

While I support the bill, I take issue with the Majority’s rhetoric.  It is important that we set the record straight here.

I reserve the balance of my time.
______________________________________

CLOSING REMARKS

In closing, I want to reiterate my support for H.R. 372. 

As I have already mentioned, House Democrats have long supported legislation to repeal the McCarran-Ferguson Act’s exemption for the business of insurance.

Repealing the antitrust exemption for health insurers, as H.R. 372 does, will make the Affordable Care Act even more effective.

I disagree, however, with the Majority’s attempt to use this legislation as a fig leaf for replacing the Affordable Care Act. 

Indeed, the same architects of the Majority’s “repeal and replace” effort—including Speaker Paul Ryan, Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, and Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady—voted against a substantively identical version of this bill in 2010. 
           
Let us not be fooled. I yield back.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Tuesday, March 21, 2017

9th Circuit Opinion Says Child Welfare Workers Do Not Have"Right To Lie"

On January 3, 2017, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals rendered its opinion in the "Right To Lie" case.
9th Circuit Judge Stephen Trott

I can not give this opinion its proper honors due, so instead, I have provided a few highlights of Judge Stephen Trott's opinion.
No official with an IQ greater than room temperature in Alaska could claim that he or she did not know that the conduct at the center of this case violated both state and federal law.  The social workers in this case are alleged to have knowingly and maliciously violated the law in their attempt to sever Preslie’s protected relationship with her mother. Perjury is a crime under both federal and California state law, as is the knowing submission of false evidence to a court.
Then, there was this one.
When asked about these legal facts during oral argument, the following colloquy occurred: 
Judge Trott: Are you telling me that a person in your client’s shoes could not understand you cannot commit perjury in a court proceeding in order to take somebody’s children away? 
Answer: Of course not. 
Judge Owens: Was there anything you know of that told social workers that they should lie and they should create false evidence in a court proceeding? 
Answer: No . . . .
In a nutshell, the Justices ripped these child welfare workers, the county, and the legal community a new one by stating that

Trust me, I will be following up on this one because I want to know if the DOJ is going to follow up with criminal charges and if there exists an attorney, or just a warm body with a valid P number who is game on calling me to assist in bringing forth an action of false claims.

Hell, State can bring forth an action against Orange County.

But, of course, nothing will happen and the child welfare system will continue to operate as usual, well, they may snatch more kids to make up for the settlement of the case.


Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS Statement At Hearing With DOJ IG & GAO Directors Of Justice & Homeland Issues

Washington, D.C. – House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) provided the following remarks at a hearing entitled, “Examining Systemic Management and Fiscal Challenges Within the Department of Justice” featuring Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz and U.S. Government Accountability Office of Homeland Security and Justice Director Diana Maurer:


Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you to our distinguished guests for joining us today.

Mr. Chairman, I understand that you have framed this hearing around management and fiscal challenges at the Department of Justice.

Like you—and like our witnesses from the Government Accountability Office and the Office of the Inspector General—I believe that meaningful oversight of the Department of Justice requires us all to be good stewards of taxpayer funds.

There are many areas we can pursue, including the disproportionate amount of the Department’s budget that is consumed by prison spending.  In addition, the Inspector General has issued a report specifying serious problems with privately operated prisons, which do not maintain the same level of safety and security as Bureau of Prisons facilities and which do not provide an adequate level of rehabilitative services.  These are troubling issues that many of my colleagues, including Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee, and I have focused on over the years. 

However, given the roles our witnesses play in more pressing developments at the Department of Justice, I would also like to focus my time today on a few, more discrete issues.

First, on the topic of fiscal management, I wonder if our witnesses can speak to the budget priorities of the Trump Administration.

This Committee has oversight of the United States Secret Service—an agency that provides protection to the President every time he travels to New York or Florida for the weekend, and to his family as they travel the world to advance the interests of the Trump Organization.

It seems to me that the GAO is the right organization to evaluate the cost of that protection to the taxpayer, and to place that cost in the context of a proposed budget that makes deep cuts to a number of important programs.

Second, on February 17, 2017, Mr. Jeffries and I wrote a letter—signed by many of my colleagues—to you, Mr. Inspector General.

In that letter, we asked your office to investigate two matters: (1) whether the Trump Administration has engaged any improper effort to intimidate or threaten whistleblowers, and (2) whether Attorney General Sessions has a conflict of interest that requires his recusal from any matter involving contact between Russian officials and the Trump campaign.

Let me be clear: I do not condone the leaks of classified information to the press. 

But the President has gone out of his way to intimidate virtually any individual hoping to expose misconduct in the Trump Administration—including but not limited to random searches of personal cell phones, and general harassment via Twitter.

I know that the Inspector General agrees that whistleblowers are key to identifying waste, fraud, and abuse, and I hope his office is looking into the matter.

Finally, on March 16, 2017, I again wrote to the Inspector General, this time asking about improper contacts between the White House and the Department of Justice.

We know that the White House Chief of Staff has called the Director and Deputy Director of the FBI, asking them to comment publicly to “knock down” reporting he did not like.

We also know that President Trump placed a phone call to Preet Bharara, former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, the day before the Administration summarily fired all 46 sitting U.S. Attorneys.
           
And, we know that these calls are in direct violation of standing guidance at the Department of Justice, prohibiting contact between its investigators and the White House except in extraordinary circumstances.

To their credit, none of these officials complied with pressure from the White House.  Knowing the Department’s rules about such contacts, Mr. Bharara did not even take the call.

Nevertheless, I fear that the White House has ignored this important policy—and that further investigation by the Inspector General is warranted.

I look forward to our discussion on these and other matters today, I thank the Chairman, and I yield back.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Judiciary Democrats Release Background Fact Sheet on H.R. 372, the “Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act of 2017”


Prepared by Democratic staff of the Committee on the Judiciary

H.R. 372, the “Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act of 2017,” would partially repeal the limited Federal antitrust exemption for the business of insurance established by the McCarran-Ferguson Act in 1945. H.R. 372 would only permit federal antitrust enforcement with regard to health insurers.

House Democrats have previously supported a full repeal of McCarran-Ferguson’s antitrust exemption for all insurers, not just health insurers. In 2010, House Democrats also passed more limited legislation to repeal McCarran-Ferguson’s antitrust immunity for health insurers by a vote of 406 to 19. House Republicans had not previously expressed any interest in moving any version of this legislation.

While there has been and continues to be bipartisan support for the repeal of McCarran-Ferguson with regard to health insurers, the Majority has made a series of overstated claims regarding H.R. 372 as part of the so-called “third phase” of their health care “reform” efforts. As such, we do not endorse the Majority’s exaggerated claims that passage of H.R. 372 will somehow create major new competition, significantly improve the affordability and availability of health insurance, or encourage health insurers to sell insurance products across state lines. In reality, this legislation:

·         Will Not Significantly Improve Healthcare Affordability or Coverage. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the effect of H.R. 372 on health insurance premiums “would probably be quite small,” and enacting the bill will have “no significant net effect on the premiums that private insurers would charge for health or dental insurance.”Consumers Union states that the application of the antitrust laws to some health insurance activity is simply not enough to create a vibrant insurance market because our “long experience shows you can’t expect a health care system to run effectively on competition alone.”

·         Does Not Enable Health Insurers to Sell Insurance Across State Lines. Enabling the Federal antitrust agencies to police certain forms of anticompetitive conduct will not in and of itself incentivize health insurers to offer products across state lines. In fact, current state and Federal law, including the Affordable Care Act, already allows states to agree with each other to provide for cross-state insurance sales.

·         Does Not Protect Consumers Against Discrimination or Premium Growth. H.R. 372 only applies to certain anticompetitive conduct and does not change the regulation of health insurance. For example, it does not prohibit discrimination based on preexisting conditions, reduce premium growth, or require health insurers to be accountable for price increases.

         
Does Not Provide the Antitrust Agencies with Necessary Resources to Enforce the Law. If the Administration truly wanted to encourage more vigorous antitrust enforcement in the health insurance market, they would fully fund and appoint heads to the antitrust agencies. Instead, the President Trump’s recently issued budget blueprint would reduce DOJ funding overall, to the likely detriment of antitrust enforcement.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS: Trump's ICE Detainer Report Shames Courageous Local Law Enforcement

Washington, D.C. – House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) today released the following statement after the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) issued its first Declined Detainer Outcome Report, below, which, according to ICE, highlights jurisdictions that choose not to cooperate with ICE detainers or requests for notification:

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.
“The Trump administration took the bold step of publically shaming courageous, committed and hardworking local law enforcement agencies around the country.  The Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Declined Detainer Outcome Report (DDOR) condemns local governments and instead substitutes the anti-immigrant policies of the Trump administration for the judgment of police officers that are on the ground and in communities.  Local community trust policies are proven to keep communities safe, and they rely on the critical distinction between local police and immigration enforcement officers.   The Trump Administration has repeatedly promised to get the federal government out of people’s lives, but this report demonstrates that it intends to strong arm anyone that disagrees with its ideology, even at the expense of community safety and local police autonomy.”  

According to the Washington Post, Cody Wofsy, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union’s Immigrants’ Rights Project said, “This is part of an overall strategy to try to scare jurisdictions into becoming deportation agents. And the truth is that jurisdictions have the legal right to refuse to become entangled with the federal immigration enforcement system.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS: Immigration at the crossroads

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.
Two months into the Trump presidency, our nation stands on the verge of turning away from our historic role as a place of refuge and tolerance and, instead, heading down a path of xenophobia and paranoia.

The repackaged Muslim ban, issued by President Donald Trump this month and already blocked by two federal courts, is only the most immediate flash point, but the risks go much further.

Like the previous ban which was also stayed by the courts, the intent and effect of the revised executive order is the same: religious discrimination.

The ban circumscribes travel from six nations, totaling more than 180 million people that are all more than 90 percent Muslim.

It does this even though the Homeland Security Department’s own leaked memos conclude that citizenship is a poor threat indicator.

The executive order also ignores the fact that not a single individual from the six identified nations has killed an American on U.S. soil in the last 40 years.

Although receiving less media attention, the revised order also ends our nation’s traditional leadership providing refuge for persecuted individuals.

It does this by suspending the refugee program entirely for one third of a year, then cutting refugee admissions in half, and also paving the way for state and local governments to restrict refugee resettlement even further.

Other Trump executive orders issued since the inauguration also reverse longstanding policy and unfairly and inhumanely target immigrants.

On his fifth day in office, Trump issued decrees allowing the federal government to cut off federal funding to so-called “sanctuary cities,” estimated to cost Michigan nearly $2 million per year in urgently needed public safety funds.

Late last month, the Homeland Security Department issued two additional orders classifying virtually all undocumented individuals in America — not just violent felons — as enforcement priorities; and eviscerating their due process rights.

This subjects millions upon millions of law abiding immigrants to the risk of deportation.

As a direct result, immigrant homes are already being broken into by federal agents and immigrant families have already been torn apart, with many more to come.

In one case, a father was arrested after dropping of his daughter at school, sending fear and shockwaves throughout the school and the community.

There are even more dangerous immigration orders still being considered by the Trump administration.

One such order would designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a “foreign terrorist organization.”

This would subject non-violent, law-abiding Muslims across the world to Draconian penalties, including denial of entry to the U.S. or deportation, as well as criminal penalties.

Another potential order would overhaul a federal program designed to counter all violent ideologies to only focus on “radical Islamic extremism.”

A third pending proposal would separate women and children crossing the border together, which could negatively impact more than 50,000 people a year.

 Because of our openness and diversity, southeast Michigan is ground zero in the Trump administration’s war against immigration and Islam.

It is also clear that this is a battle Trump will not give up easily.

If we are going to avoid the path of fear mongering and division, we will need to rely on all of our institutional checks and balances to counter these dangerous, counterproductive policies.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Arizona Gets Busted Wiretapping Parents

Of course, in the spirit of fuchsia and my provocative pungency in dealing with child welfare fraud and human trafficking, behold, the color commentary awaits...

Arizona child-welfare agency scraps secret recordings





Arizona's child-welfare agency says it's tossing out a new policy allowing for secret recordings of adults suspected of child abuse.

I really have no idea why Arizona would scrap such a secretive policy.  I mean, child welfare has no civil rights and one is prosecuted by social workers, devoid of legal representation, without any opportunity to confront one's accuser, based upon predictive modeling of predicting one's future behavior which can and will be used in a court of law.  This was their best guarantee money maker of billing Medicaid for those Targeted Case Management Services and to bring in a new crop of kids for human trafficking and parents to become cheap labor.

The move comes after 12 News raised questions about the policy with the Department of Public Safety.

See, you guys over at 12 News just had to go and bust up a violation of due process hustle.

Family law attorney Gregg Woodnick had brought the policy to our attention.

Now, I am bringing this to the attention of any law attorney, who should get with me to construct a massive class action, before the Congress strips this ability from the people.  Seriously.

DCS is "essentially performing polygraphs on people unwittingly," he said.

This is more than just polygraphs being conducted "unwittingly".  This is about a pattern of practice in civil rights violations and human trafficking.  This is about the filing of false claims to the federal government.  Who do you think "unwittingly" financed this polygraphic intrusion of privacy?  Medicaid.

Jennifer Kupiszewski, an attorney and former assistant attorney general, said the DCS policy was "shocking."

It is not a shock.  It is an industry.  You have attorneys who are not particularly swift with legal acumen as they actually defend cases where one is considered "guilty until proven innocent" and have never, ever, publicly spoken out about the lack or parallel jurisprudence with traditional court.

"You have an agency that is conducting covert interviews and they may have their children," she said.

This "covert interview" process is just another technique to acquire the child for billing purposes.


"How do you trust that agency to work with you, to take care of your children?"

You do not trust that agency, or any other child welfare agency.  The entire goal of the agency is sustainability, you know, keeping the paychecks coming and the doors open.


Woodnick, a family law attorney for 17 years, inadvertently discovered the three-month-old DCS policy, approved two days before last Christmas.

The policy allows investigators in DCS' Office of Child Welfare Investigations to covertly use a computer voice stress analyzer in certain situations.


DCS Director Greg McKay is a former Phoenix cop who headed OCWI five years ago.

Promotional videos for the CVSA say it is "non-invasive, easy to learn, quick to use." Advocates say it's more accurate than a polygraph.

But there is little research on the effectiveness of computer voice analysis.

One independent study found the lie detector was "no better than flipping a coin."

After 12 News notified DCS we were doing a story on the secret recordings, an agency spokeswoman, Cynthia Weiss, said the policy was being "rescinded":
"We have been looking at this policy and intend to rescind the portion of the policy relative to covert use of a CVSA exam. Although conducting 'covert' CVSA's was initially discussed and entered into the CVSA policy, it was later decided that covert CVSA's would not be conducted."
Weiss said no secret recordings had been made yet.

Riiiiiiiiiight. (winky winky).  You know damn well they have been doing this for some time until some social worker "legal genius" (trademark pending) came up with the idea to actually get a state administrator to codify it into policy.

"That’s not what they’re supposed to be doing," Kupiszewski said.

Yes, it is and you have been doing this since human trafficking was made more fashionably billable under CAPTA and ASFA.  Please, spare me with your ignorance, Kupiszewski.  Learn your industry.

"I can hear it when I talk to families. They say they feel bullied or threatened, and they definitely have expressed that they felt like DCS is not honest with them during the investigation process. This would indicate that maybe there is some merit to those claims."

Many of these Child Protective Service workers are products of the child ,welfare system and are only doing what was done to them.  They can do whatever they want because they are the ones who generate reports to the court, of which you have no right to challenge any of the conjured evidence they generate before or after the court hearing.

It does not matter because it takes a judicial determination to turn the federal funding spigot of a child welfare case, for, without these cases, people would be out of a job, become poor and be automatically, per state statutes, prosecuted for the crime of  "failing to provide for the necessary needs of their own child".


By the way, in the State of Arizona, child welfare court proceedings are closed to the public because it is a secret.  

For some strange reason, like taking down a policy when you know you have been busted, I could not secure the policy pdf from the state website, so, here is the link, and, below, is the text, because I like to preserve the annals of history.


Arizona Department of Child Safety

TITLE: OCWI Computer Voice Stress Analysis

I. POLICY NUMBER: DCS 13-01

RESPONSIBLE AREA:  Office of Child Welfare Investigations

EFFECTIVE DATE:  12/23/16

REVISION: 0

POLICY STATEMENT
This policy supports the Department's commitment to maintain the highest professional standards and to use available technology to support its mission of ensuring child safety.

II. APPLICABILITY
This policy applies to all OCWI staff conducting investigations. It addresses the use of the investigative tool, of an OCWI conducted CSVA examination.

III. AUTHORITY
A.R.S. § 8-453 Powers and duties.
A.R.S. § 8-456 Investigative function; training; criminal offenses; definition
A.R.S. § 8-471 Office of child welfare investigations; training; responsibilities; annual report
A.R.S. § 8-802 Child safety worker; fingerprint clearance cards; interview requirements;
temporary custody limit; cooperation and coordination; alteration of files; violation; classification

IV. DEFINITIONS
Audio Analysis: The CVSA Examiner's analysis of the recorded responses of the recorded
interview.
Cold Read: A review by a second C V S A E x a m i n e r (who is not familiar with the details of the case) who reads the chart of an interview based strictly on the assessment of the charts that
were generated from the initial interview.
Computer Voice Stress Analyzer (CVSA): An instrument to detect, measure, and chart the stress in a person’s voice following a pre-formatted questionnaire.
Covert Interview: A structured interview by the CVSA Examiner or investigator designed to capture a response to preformatted questions. The interview is conducted without prior knowledge or consent of the subject of the examination.
Department: or DCS: The Arizona Department of Child Safety.
CVSA Examiner: An OCWI investigator who has successfully completed training and been certified in the use of CVSA.
OCWI: The Department's Office of Child Welfare Investigations.
Overt Interview: A live, structured interview by a CVSA Examiner. The interview is conducted with the prior knowledge and consent of the subject of the investigation. 
Subject of the Examination: The person who will be examined by the CVSA Examiner.
V. POLICY
This policy provides staff conducting OCWI investigations with standards and procedures for requesting and conducting CVSA interviews in OCWI investigations.
A. Use of a CSVA examination in an OCWI Investigation.
1.
2.
B. The OCWI Investigator shall use the CVSA results primarily to: 
a. Verify, corroborate, or refute statements;
b.Obtain additional investigative leads; and
c. Narrow or focus investigations.
The OCWI Investigator shall not use the CVSA results as the final determinant in an investigation, or as a substitute for other sound investigation techniques. 
Eligibility for a CVSA Interview
1.Interviews shall be conducted at the discretion of the CVSA Examiner, in accordance with Department policy and State and Federal law.
2. The CVSA Examiner shall not conduct a CVSA interview on any person who the CVSA Examiner believes to be physically or emotionally unsuitable for testing. This may include, but is not limited to:
a. Persons with heart conditions;
b. Women who are pregnant; and
c. Individuals taking certain types of medication that may interfere with the test results.
3. The CVSA Examiner may seek guidance concerning eligibility from medical or psychological professionals as authorized by the Department. The CVSA Examiner may request the person being interviewed to obtain a medical certificate from an appropriate health care provider in order to help determine eligibility.
4. Persons who are eligible for CVSA interview:
5.C.a. Any individual who is 18 years of age or older, who knows right from wrong;
b.
A child under 18 years of age:
i. Who knows right from wrong;
ii.Who has parental or legal guardian consent prior to theCVSA interview; and
iii. The consent is in writing and in the possession of the CVSA Examiner prior to the beginning of the interview.
Persons who are not eligible for CVSA interview:
a. Any person who has been forced or coerced.
b. Any person who has been indicted by a Grand Jury or formally charged for the crime in which the CVSA is being requested.
c. Any person previously administered an interview (CVSA, polygraph or similar truth verification testing), except under special circumstances and with the approval of the CVSA Examiner, OCWI management, and law enforcement.
d. Any person who has a mental or behavioral health disability or who is impaired by drugs or alcohol to the extent that the CVSA Examiner believes the interview should not, at present, be conducted.
Conduct of a CSVA Interview
1. Overt Interviews
a. The CVSA Examiner shall prepare all questions used in the interview.
b.The CVSA Examiner shall conduct the overt interview using approved CVSA Protocols;
c. The CVSA Examiner has the discretion to authorize other persons to be inside the observation room or the interview room during overt interviews.
2. Covert Interviews
a. 
D.
E.
A covert CVSA will only be conducted in the following scenarios
i. The individual is the subject of a criminal conduc investigation and is refusing to meet with the Department in person; and
ii. If the individual has not already declined to participate in a CVSA.
b. The CVSA Examiner shall conduct the covert interview using approved CVSA Protocols.
c. Notice to or consent by the subject of the interview is not required for Covert CVSA interviews.
d. Eligibility questions are not required to be used in cover CVSA interviews.
e. The CVSA Examiner has the discretion to authorize other persons to be inside the interview room during covert interviews.
f. The OCWI Chief, or any Designees, approves or disapproves the request for a CVSA Interview in advance, based on available resources.
CVSA Records
1. Each CVSA Examiner shall maintain a log of all interviews conducted.
2. CVSA records shall be maintained in accordance with State records retention laws.
CVSA Equipment: OCWI shall maintain the Department's CVSA equipment to ensure its availability and accuracy of results.
F. Responsibilities of the CVSA Examiner
1. The CVSA Examiner shall refrain from any interview that may compromise the CVSA Examiner's integrity; for example:
a. The CVSA Examiner shall not conduct a CVSA interview on the CVSA Examiner's own investigative cases.
b. Only fully trained CVSA Examiners shall conduct CVSA interviews.
c. The CVSA Examiner shall keep all relevant certifications current, and, with the support of the agency, shall maintain proficiency in the use of CVSA equipment and interview techniques.
2.G.
VI. Only the CVSA Examiner shall make entries in CHILDS or reports related to CVSA results determinations.
Responsibilities of the OCWI Investigation.
1. When arranging interviews, the OCWI Investigator shall not explain to the subject of an investigation the procedures that will be used in the CVSA interview.
2. OCWI Investigators who are not CVSA Examiners shall not interpret or otherwise make any determination concerning the results of a CVSA in a report or in case notes.
3. The OCWI Investigator shall not interview the subject on the same day of the CVSA interview prior to the completion of the CVSA interview.
PROCEDURES: These procedures establish the process for an OCWI Investigator to request and conduct a CVSA interview during an investigation.
A.
B. Requesting the CVSA Interview. 
1. An OCWI administered CVSA interview may be requested by an OCWI Investigator assigned to an OCWI Investigation.
2. An OCWI administered CVSA interview may be requested when:
a. The assigned DCS investigation includes at least one Criminal Conduct allegation, except as provided for in VI.(B)(3);
b. The subject of the examination is eligible under the Eligibility for a CSVA Interview criteria in section V.(B)(4); and
c. After collaboration and clearance from law enforcement.
Approval of the request for a CSVA interview
1. The request for an OCWI CVSA interview must be approved by the OCWI Chief or designee.
2. The OCWI Chief or designee has the discretion to deny the request for any reason, including lack of resources.
3.C. Arranging the Examination
1. The requesting OCWI Investigator contacts an OCWI CVSA Examiner.
2. The OCWI investigator and the CVSA Examiner review the case to determine whether a CVSA is appropriate for a person(s) in an OCWI investigation.
3. If a CVSA is deemed appropriate they determine which:
4.D. The OCWI Chief or designee may authorize, subject to available resources, the use of an OCWI administered CVSA interview on any DCS case for investigative or non-investigative purposes.
a. Subject(s) will be interviewed; and
b. Type of examination to conduct for each subject.
The OCWI Investigator works with the CVSA Examiner to arrange a date and time for each interview.
Preparing for the CVSA Interview
The OCWI Investigator provides the CVSA Examiner with pertinent information concerning the investigation. 
E.1. If the subject of the examination requires an interpreter, the OCWI Investigator arranges for an interpreter or translator as determined by the CVSA Examiner.
2. The OCWI Investigator meets with the assigned CVSA Examiner:
a. The CVSA Examiner reviews available information pertaining to the investigation and if necessary, requests additional information from the OCWI Investigator; 
b. The OCWI Investigator provides clarifying or elaborating information as the CVSA Examiner may deem necessary.
c. The CVSA Examiner develops the questions for the interview.
Conducting Overt CVSA Interviews
1. Should the subject of the examination be late for, or cancel, the appointment, the OCWI Investigator shall immediately notify the CVSA Examiner.
2.The CVSA Examiner shall determine the subject of the examination's health, medical history and/or use of medications as necessary to assess his/her ability to undergo the interview.
F.
G.
VII.
3. The CVSA Examiner shall obtain consent from the subject of the examination, and the consent is documented on the Consent to Computer Voice Stress Analyzer Examination Consent Form (DCS-1221A).
4. Consent for the CVSA may be obtained over the phone.
5. The DCS 1221A shall be kept in the case file.
Conducting Covert CVSA Interviews
1. The OCWI Investigator shall not inform the subject of the examination.
2. The CVSA Examiner shall not obtain consent from the subject of the examination. A DCS-1221A is not completed.
3. The CVSA Examiner shall not ask the subject of the examination eligibility or control questions.
Interpreting the CVSA Interview Results
1. The CVSA Examiner shall review the CVSA examination chart.
2. The CVSA Examiner shall reach one of the following two conclusions:
a. No Deception Indicated (NDI); or
b. Deception Indicated (DI).
3. The CVSA Examiner shall solicit a cold read by a second CVSA examiner.
4. The second CVSA Examiner independently shall read the chart and render an opinion.
5. The original CVSA Examiner shall render a final report.
6. The original CVSA Examiner shall enter the information into CHILDS.
7. The original CVSA Examiner shall store all related data according to policy.
8. The original CVSA Examiner shall provide the OCWI Investigator with the final report.
9. A copy of the report shall be kept in the DCS file according to the Department’s record retention schedule.
FORMS INDEX
Consent to Computer Voice Stress Analyzer Examination (DCS-1221A)
DCS 13-01 OCWI Computer Voice Stress Analysis
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©