Tales Of The New Crown: Food Banks Are Banks, Too

Feeding America came into existence for a reason.

That reason was to run fraud schemes.

There are multiple food bank fraud schemes.

Why is there even a need for a food bank?

Why are children being raised in poor families?

Poverty is manufactured for the purposes of maximizing revenues because a non profit cannot generate profit.

Poverty is just part of the industry of trafficking tiny humans because you have to feed your chattel <===(pun intended).

In the mean time, here is the link to find some food.

Actually, I must admit, the food banks have kicked their game up as of recent.

https://www.feedingamerica.org/find-your-local-foodbank

Feeding America Establishes COVID-19 Response Fund to Help Food Banks During the Coronavirus Pandemic

Funds will be Used to Aid the Most Vulnerable People Throughout the Country

Feeding America, the nation’s largest domestic hunger-relief organization with a network of 200 member food banks across the country, today announced the establishment of the COVID-19 Response Fund to help food banks across the country as they support communities impacted by the pandemic. The $2.65 million fund will enable food banks to secure the resources they need to serve the most vulnerable members of the community during this difficult time. Still, it is impossible for the Feeding America network to address this pandemic without public and government support, so that food banks can do what they do best — feed people in need within their communities.

While the media has reported greater at-risk factors for COVID-19 among the general population, such as age and pre-existing health conditions, many may not realize food-insecure households are likely more susceptible to the virus. This is believed to be due to lesser access to adequate health care, lower resistance or compromised immune systems, stigma or bias, or lack of information about proper prevention and care.

In addition, school closures, job disruptions, lack of paid sick leave and the coronavirus’ disproportionate impact on adults age 60 and older and low-income families further contribute to the demands placed on food banks. Lost wages or sudden expenses due to illness will be increasingly burdensome for the millions of people in America who live paycheck to paycheck, especially when, according to the Federal Reserve, 40 percent of Americans don’t have enough cash on hand to cover a $400 emergency expense.

In the face of these challenges, the Feeding America network of food banks is uniquely positioned to help people who need it most. Per the most recent USDA food security report, more than 37 million people, 11 million of whom are children, face hunger. As the largest provider of charitable food assistance in the U.S., including in disaster and emergency situations, Feeding America provides more than 4.2 billion meals to people facing hunger each year.

“Our first priority is the millions of individuals, families and seniors who rely on food banks for help,” said Feeding America CEO Claire Babineaux-Fontenot. “Our member food banks are always there to help throughout the year and in times of disaster. This fund will advance their ability to respond efficiently and effectively in their communities so that food is not added to the list of worries for families during this pandemic.” Babineaux-Fontenot added, “We cannot do it alone.”

Using the COVID-19 Response Fund, Feeding America is launching national food- and fund-raising efforts to support people facing hunger and the food banks who help them. This includes building an inventory of emergency food boxes and distributing them to member food banks across the country, as well as working to get incremental funding to support other anticipated costs. Feeding America is also working with government leaders to ensure the emergency response includes strong supports in food, funds, and flexibility for federal nutrition programs.

Member food banks have started shifting operations, adding more mobile or “drive-thru” distributions wherever possible. In addition, food banks are working with partner food pantries and meal programs to minimize the risk of spreading the disease by scheduling appointments and suggesting that only one member of the household visit the pantry or distribution site in order to decrease the number of people congregating in one place.

To learn more and support efforts at the national level, visit feedingamerica.org. To support your community or affected communities directly, you can use the Feeding America food bank locator at https://www.feedingamerica.org/find-your-local-foodbank.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

JUDICIARY: Online Platforms and Market Power, Part 3: The Role of Data and Privacy in Competition - Bioethics In Modern Day Human Trafficking

Iceland has a generational genetic repository.

Penn State University seems to run the bioethics portion of modern day human trafficking in support of Iceland's commercialization of really, really, tiny humans, like genomes for genomic predictive modeling crap.

Wayne State University has the blood bank.

University of Michigan has the library system of predictive modeling crap.

Michigan State University looks to be the keyman for all the human lab rat experiments.

WHO definitions of genetics and genomics
 Genetics is the study of heredity.1 Genomics is defined as the study of genes and their functions, and related techniques. 1,2 The main difference between genomics and genetics is that genetics scrutinizes the functioning and composition of the single gene where as genomics addresses all genes and their inter relationships in order to identify their combined influence on the growth and development of the organism.

Bioethics is just another reengineered component when it comes to the residuals of the peculiar institution, which is what shall eventually aid in the obviation of policy and law, specifically in the areas of procurement for inurement.

https://www.decode.com/

https://cofs.lara.state.mi.us/CorpWeb/CorpSearch/CorpSummary.aspx?ID=801050160&SEARCH_TYPE=3

Michigan

It all started in Detroit.

Iceland Inc on the Ethics of Commercial Population Genomics by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS, CUMMINGS, CONNOLLY & CICILLINE Request Documents about President Trump’s Regulatory Task Forces’ Secret Meetings and Conflicts of Interest

Washington, D.C. (August 7, 2017)—Today, Reps. John Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member of the House Committee on the Judiciary, Elijah E. Cummings, Ranking Member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Gerry Connolly, Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Government Operations, and David Cicilline, Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law, sent a letter, below, to Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney and Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs Administrator Neomi Rao expressing grave concerns about the secrecy of the Regulatory Reform Task Forces and requesting information about the nature of their meetings.

“We write to express our alarm concerning the lack of transparency, accountability, and independence of the Regulatory Reform Task Forces,” the Members wrote. “We believe that the interests of the American public must be paramount when reviewing the worthiness of regulations. Therefore, these Task Forces must have an effective and transparent guard against conflicts of interest, especially those in which industry lobbyists seek to overturn environmental and health protections for financial gain. It appears that the current Task Forces are already failing on this front, and instead are actively hiding their members and their meetings from public view.”

The Democrats explained that press reports indicate these Task Forces appear to have operated in private without public input, and some agencies have refused to release basic information about their activity or maintain a record of their meetings as required by the Federal Records Act.

“Withholding the names and titles of Task Force participants may also violate the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA),” the Members wrote. “Simply put, it is unacceptable for federal agencies to operate in such a clandestine and unaccountable manner especially when the result could be the undoing of critical public health and safety protections.”

The Members also expressed concern that several employees stand to profit from their work on the Task Force. For example, the wife of one Task Force member at the Environmental Protection Agency is the top lobbyist for a large oil company.

“Rather than ‘drain the swamp,’ these conflicts threaten to influence the outcome of the review process against hardworking Americans and in favor of regulated industries and agency staff,” the Members wrote.

The Members requested documents and information, including a description of every Task Force created pursuant to the executive order, a list of the names and titles of every member of each Task Force, and communications related to non-governmental entities participating in Task Force meetings.

Congressional Letter To OMB On Executive Order On Regulatory Task Force 2017-08-7 by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS: Statement for the Hearing on H.R. 2887, the No Regulation Without Representation Act of 2017

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

Before I begin my remarks, I’d like to take a moment to recognize Joseph Ehrenkrantz for his dedicated service to the House of Representatives.

Over the past two years, he has diligently served the House Judiciary Committee as a Professional Staff Member.

Joe began his career with the House Judiciary Committee Democrats shortly after graduation, and has worked tirelessly on issues of civil rights, state and local taxation, and voting rights ever since.

Joe has served the Members and staff of the Committee with great energy and enthusiasm, working to ensure the smooth functioning of Committee business by coordinating briefings, staffing hearings, and clerking markups.

We thank Joe for his many outstanding contributions to the House Judiciary Committee and the U.S. House of Representatives, and wish him well as he begins law school at Georgetown University this fall.

He will surely be missed.

Turning to today’s hearing, which focuses on H.R. 2887, the “No Regulation Without Representation Act of 2017,” it appears that supporters of this legislation intend to address the apparent problem of states regulating beyond their borders.

Twenty-five years ago, the Supreme Court in Quill held that a state may require a business to remit a sales tax only if such business had a physical presence in the state where the goods or services are provided. 

In an effort to respond to this holding, various legislative responses have been introduced over the years, including two of which I strongly supported, namely, The Remote Transactions Parity Act and the Marketplace Fairness Act. 

Although one of these bipartisan measures overwhelmingly passed the Senate in 2013, our Committee has unfortunately failed to consider either of these bills. 

Instead, we are focusing today on H.R. 2887, a highly-flawed measure. 

Among its many flaws, this bill would eviscerate the 10^th Amendment and override the powers of all 50 states by expanding the physical presence standard to all taxes and all regulations.

H.R. 2887 represents an extreme rethinking of the constitutional role of states in our Nation and would strip essential consumer protection powers and taxing authority from all 50 states.

To quote the bipartisan National Governors Association and the National Conference of State Legislatures, this legislation “is a direct threat to representative self-government.”

Simply put, H.R. 2887 would preempt tens of thousands of state laws and saddle these states with untenable budget constraints by reducing their ability to collect tax revenues.

Second, this bill appears to ignore the real problems that main street retailers face today.

Local retailers—that have to collect sales taxes—are desperately struggling to compete with the reduced prices and conveniences offered by remote Internet sellers, whose online prices are generally lower because many consumers do not pay any sales taxes and thereby can save upwards of 10% or more on the purchase price of these items.

Technological advancements have made it easier for consumers to take advantage of this disparity and the consequences of this loophole are becoming increasingly more apparent.

Since October, at least 10 major, nationwide brick and mortar retailers have filed for bankruptcy and more than 90,000 workers have been laid off. 

Retail sector growth is at its weakest since the Great Recession, and recent projections estimate that a quarter of all U.S. shopping malls will close in the next five years.

Without question, I am a strong supporter of competition, especially when it benefits consumers and encourages innovation. Nevertheless, competitors should compete on things other than sales tax policy.

We should ensure parity at the point of sale among retailers and level the playing field.

Finally, H.R. 2887, by codifying Quill, would effectively prevent states and local governments from accessing a substantial part of their tax base.

State governments rely on sales and use taxes for nearly one third of their total tax revenue. Yet, as more Americans purchase more of their goods on the internet, the states receive less in sales tax revenue.

We owe it to our local communities and local retailers, as well as state and local governments, to take up helpful legislation rather than considering such flawed measures as H.R. 2887.  Accordingly, I urge Committee Chairman Goodlatte and Subcommittee Chairman Marino to instead consider H.R. 2193, the “Remote Transaction Parity Act,” bipartisan legislation introduced by Representative Kristi Noem earlier this year.

In closing, I look forward to hearing the testimony from our witnesses today and yield back the balance of my time.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS: Statement for the Markup of H.R. 469, the “Sunshine for Regulations and Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act of 2017”

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

H.R. 469, the “Sunshine for Regulations and Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act of 2017,” has a simple goal:  to discourage the use of settlement agreements and consent decrees.

Here are just a few reasons why this is problematic.

To begin with, this bill, by delaying regulatory protections, jeopardizes public health and safety.  This explains why the Administration issued a veto threat against a very similar version included in legislation considered last Congress. 

It also explains why a broad consortium of more than 150 organizations strenuously oppose this bill. 

These organizations include the National Resources Defense Council, the American Civil Liberties Union, the NAACP, the Sierra Club, and EarthJustice, among other groups.

Simply put, this bill could be used to prevent critical, life-saving federal regulatory actions from being implemented.

For example, the bill gives opponents of regulation multiple opportunities to stifle agency regulatory actions by allowing essentially any third party who is affected by such actions to:

•                     intervene, subject to rebuttal;

•                     participate in settlement negotiations; and

•                     submit public comments about a proposed consent decree or settlement agreement that agencies would then be required to respond to.

In the case of consent decrees concerning a rulemaking, an agency would be forced to go through two public comment periods:  one for the consent decree and one for the rulemaking that results from the consent decree, doubling the agency’s effort.

Take, for example, a consent decree resolving a dispute under the Clean Air Act.  The bill would allow any private party whose rights are affected by such decree a right to intervene, which could conceivably include anyone who breathes air. 

Like nearly all of the anti-regulatory bills we have considered to date over the last three Congresses, H.R. 469 piles on unnecessary procedural requirements for agencies and courts.

Another concern is that this bill threatens to undermine a critical tool that Americans use to guarantee their Congressionally-mandated protections, including civil rights laws. 

By reducing costly and time-consuming litigation, consent decrees and settlement agreements benefit both plaintiffs and defendants. 

They ensure that federal protections are enforced, while giving state and local governments flexibility as to how they meet their federal obligations.

Consent decrees, in particular, have been instrumental in enforcing various civil rights statutes in a wide variety cases, ranging from those involving voting rights -- to reform of mental health institutions -- to law enforcement misconduct.  Indeed, they are at the heart of civil rights enforcement.

           

Because of H.R. 469’s a chilling effect on the use of consent decrees and settlement agreements, civil rights enforcement will be undermined. 

Given this concern, I intend to offer an amendment addressing at least this one shortcoming of the bill.

Finally, H.R. 469 will inevitably generate more litigation that will result in millions of dollars of additional transactional costs, all of which will be borne by the American taxpayer. 

For example, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, in its analysis of the bill’s predecessor from the last Congress, concluded the measure would impose millions of dollars in additional costs, most of which would be “incurred because litigation involving consent decrees and settlement agreements would probably take longer under the bill and agencies would face additional administrative requirements.”

           

For all of these reasons, I must accordingly oppose H.R. 469 and I yield back the balance of my time.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS Statement for the Markup of H.R. 2851, the “Stop the Importation and Trafficking of Synthetic Analogues Act of 2017” by the Committee on the Judiciary

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

H.R. 2851, the “Stop the Importation and Trafficking of Synthetic Analogues Act of 2017,” is intended to address the problem of the illicit use of analog synthetic drugs. 

This bill involves important issues concerning public health and safety, and also fairness in our criminal justice system. 

While I appreciate the desire to protect our citizens from dangerous drugs, I must oppose this flawed bill. 

I recognize that analogs to some synthetic drugs are dangerous and are harming our citizens – particularly young people. 

Some of these modified, man-made substances are more potent, more dangerous, and oftentimes more deadly than the substances they are designed to mimic.

However, in addressing the dangers these drugs pose, I believe Congress must be careful in advancing any legislative response. 

Unfortunately, H.R. 2851, although well-intended, is ultimately unwise for several reasons.

To begin with, this measure would give the Attorney General almost unfettered authority over the regulation of these substances. 

While much of the conversation surrounding synthetic analogues focuses on the chemistry of the substances – from the process of manufacturing them to their effect on the human body – H.R. 2851 would eliminate vital scientific and medical evaluations normally undertaken by the Department of Health and Human Services and the Food and Drug Administration and do away with binding recommendations provided by the Department of Health and Human Services in scheduling drugs.

There are already statutory mechanisms in place to provide for the scheduling and regulation of new drugs that may be dangerous if misused.  Those mechanisms require an appropriate degree of collaboration among the Justice Department, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Food and Drug Administration in scheduling synthetic analogues.

This is because each of these agencies are equally important to the scheduling process.

And under this bill, not only would the Attorney General hold the sole authority to schedule these substances, but he or she would also have the power to shape sentencing policy – without the input of the U.S. Sentencing Commission that is currently studying the issue of synthetic drugs and penalties.

Secondly, we must be cautious in our response to synthetic drugs and heed the lessons we learned from the fear-driven legislation enacted in response to crack.  

For example, H.R. 2851 would establish lengthy, and sometimes mandatory minimum, penalties for certain offenses involving these analog drugs. 

While mandatory minimum sentences give the appearance that we are taking strong action to address a problem, they are patently unjust as a matter of sentencing policy and are unnecessary to the imposition of appropriate sentences.  

Indeed, extremely lengthy sentences are sometimes appropriately imposed by judges, but over-penalization through mandatory minimums is counterproductive and only contributes to our crisis of over-incarceration. 

Also, this bill has the potential to chill medical research into substances that may be beneficial, or into alternative treatments for drug addiction. 

We must be careful not to harm innovation and exploration into the development of new drugs that can actually help us. 

In closing, I want to note that the Committee has received a letter from more than 65 advocacy organizations opposing this bill – including the ACLU, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, and Families Against Mandatory Minimums. 

Furthermore, we received a letter yesterday from a number of conservative groups opposing the bill.  The signatories included Freedom Works, the American Conservative Union Foundation, and the Taxpayers Protection Alliance.

We must not ignore their concerns as we consider approaching this issue through legislation. 

Therefore, I must oppose this bill, and I ask my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to do the same today. 

I yield back the balance of my time.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

The FEC Is Alive!

Not only is the Federal Election Commission finally bringing its campaign database search engine up to date, but it is actually looking like it is a real organ of law enforcement within the Executive Branch!

via GIPHY                               Proof of Life Announcement for the FEC

FEC Approves Amended Audit Division Recommendation Memorandum, Approves Advisory Opinion, and Agrees to Commence Work on Party Rulemaking

May 25, 2017

WASHINGTON – At its open meeting today, the Federal Election Commission approved an Amended Audit Division Recommendation Memorandum and an advisory opinion, and reached consensus to begin drafting a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on political party rules.

At the start of the meeting today, Chairman Steven T. Walther noted that, in view of external events, questions have been raised with respect to the role of the Federal Election Commission concerning allegations of foreign influence in the American political process. The Chairman asked the Staff Director and other members of the staff to develop a web portal that will assemble all campaign finance information, advisory opinions, enforcement matters, and existing educational materials in this area in order to facilitate a better understanding by members of the public. He also noted that the Commissioners unanimously agreed last September to direct the Office of General Counsel “to prioritize cases involving allegations of foreign influence.” He also called upon the Office of General Counsel and other Commission staff to apply their resources, including providing adequate staffing, to continue to fulfill that priority and to further the agency’s regulatory, educational, and enforcement work in this area.

Audit Division Recommendation Memorandum on Ted Cruz for Senate. Prior to the meeting, the Commission approved on tally an Audit Division Recommendation Memorandum on Ted Cruz for Senate, covering financial activity between January 18, 2011, and December 31, 2012. The memorandum disclosed a finding and recommendation related to the reporting and disclosure of candidate loans.

Resubmission: Audit Division Recommendation Memorandum on the Colorado Republican Committee. The Commission approved the resubmitted Audit Division Recommendation Memorandum on the Colorado Republican Committee, covering financial activity between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2012, as amended at the table. The memorandum disclosed findings and recommendations related to the misstatement of financial activity, rephorting of apparent independent expenditures, recordkeeping for communications, and failure to itemize debts and obligations.

For those who do not remember or know about my stunning revelation of War Chest seeking FEC approval to use campaign contributions to invest in the markets, well, here is your friendly reminder because, below, is the ruling.

War Chest Seeks FEC Approval To Engage In Campaign & Tax Fraud

Considering the current IRS structural status of campaign committees and all sorts of Political Action Committees (PAC), the ruling to allow War Chest to utilize 

Advisory Opinion 2017-02 (War Chest, LLC). The Commission issued an advisory opinion  in response to a request from War Chest, LLC. The Commission concluded that the requestor may provide political committees with a web-based deposit program but that the political committees participating in the program may not use the requestor’s trust account or sub-investment money market accounts as campaign depositories. Political committees participating in the program would deposit funds into an account; the funds would subsequently be transferred to money market deposit accounts at banks insured  with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).

REG 2014-10, Implementing the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015, and REG 2016-03, Political Party Rules. The Commission directed the Office of General Counsel to commence drafting a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking with respect to political parties, in response to two petitions for rulemaking and a resolution introduced by Commissioner Lee E. Goodman.

FEC Response to War Chast Campaign Finance Invesstment Program by Beverly Tran on Scribd

On a side note.  I have a sneaky suspicion that this War Chest, LLC was set up by someone who works in D.C. who has had their hands in the campaign cookie jar for quite some time and is seeking a new route to skim campaign money since their side income has been substantially cut.  

That is all I am saying for now.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS, BOOKER & CICILLINE Introduce Bill To Repeal Congressional Review Act

Republicans have abused law to roll back health, environmental, and consumer protections, while benefiting special interests

WASHINGTON – Today, House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member JohnConyers, Jr. (D-MI), U.S. Congressman David N. Cicilline (D-RI), and Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) introduced a bill to repeal the Congressional Review Act, a measure Republicans have exploited this year to overturn public health, environmental, and consumer protections while advancing special interests.  

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

“From stripping the privacy rights of American consumers to repealing women’s healthcare protections, President Trump has recklessly used the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to abolish fourteen critical protections for hardworking Americans without a single hearing or markup,” Cicilline said. “Rather than keep his promise to protect American workers, President Trump has repealed guarantees that federal contractors actually comply with the law—including workers’ wage, safety, and civil rights protections—before receiving new contracts, along with rules to provide economic security to retirees. There can be no mistake that this for-profit President has no interest in putting people ahead of corporate profits. I am introducing the SCRAP Act to repeal the CRA once and for all so that this never happens again and to provide agencies with fast-track authority to reinstate the rules that have been repealed through the CRA by President Trump.”

The CRA allows Congress to quickly overturn recently issued agency rules – many of which were years or decades in the making – by bypassing Congress’s regular lawmaking process. Once a rule is reversed by the CRA, an agency can never reissue a substantially similar rule unless specifically authorized to do so under a new law.

Since February, Republicans have used the CRA to roll back a wide range of public health, environmental, and consumer protections, benefiting special interests by making it easier for internet providers to collect users’ personal information, making it easier for businesses to hide workplace dangers from workers, and making it easier for states to discriminate against family planning providers, to name just a few examples.

“Abuse of the CRA has allowed Congressional Republicans to fast track the repeal of a host of protections that benefit everyday Americans with little notice or public debate,” Booker added. “President Trump and Republicans are misusing this legislative mechanism to reward special interests and big corporations at the expense of consumers, working families, and the environment."

“Congressional Republicans and President Trump have just provided us with all the evidence needed to conclude that the Congressional Review Act is nothing more than a crass corporate payback scheme,” Public Citizen President Robert Weissman said. “Republicans repealed 14 popular and important public protections, including measures to protect consumers, worker health, and the environment. They even repealed a rule to protect privacy on the Internet; it’s hard to imagine that any American not connected to the telecom industry favored that move – but Republicans responded to their political patrons nonetheless. If there was any doubt before, it’s now certain that the CRA must go. Public Citizen applauds Senators Booker and Udall and Rep. Cicilline for introducing legislation to repeal the CRA.”

In addition to repealing the CRA, the Sunset the CRA and Restore American Protections (SCRAP) Act would remove the prohibition on agencies reissuing a previously overturned rule and would give those agencies greater flexibility in reinstating such rules.

The CRA was designed to go after “midnight” rules issued in the final days of an administration, but as written, it authorizes rule reversals going as far back as six months or more into the previous administration. Since early February, House and Senate Republican leadership in Congress has used the CRA to reverse 14 agency rules, yet prior to this Congress, the CRA had been used only once in 20 years.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

NAVIENT Engages In False Claims

Since "The Elected Ones" have failed to address the issues surrounding student debt, I thought I would do it for them.

NAVIENT is what one may call a privatized contracted administrator of student debt for the U.S. Department of Education, and it sucks.

Of course, many are already familiar with the term "predatory lending", but in this instance, this is a "predatory collection".

The tactics of this privatized group is devoid of, basically, any regulation or oversight, up until now.

If one has a complaint with accounts, or simply wishes to speak to someone about managing the debt, oh, let us say, due to long term financial hardship, considering that half the nation is in poverty, or due to a disability, or even reporting veteran status, the organization, will run you through the mill by telling you that all is well, then, turn around, without notice, and intercept the Earned Income Tax Credit, so many need to survive for the rest of the year.

Navient, trains its customer service representatives to make judicial determinations and provide false legal advice of what one can and cannot do, without any congressional approval to represent the U.S. Department of Education in a legal capacity, without a license to practice law, and to whimsically refuse to honor certified orders of judgment from federal courts.

It is notoriously known to engage in creative accounting, for the purposes of optimizing profits for its shareholders.

If you wish to file a complaint to just question its accounting practices, Navient will direct you to a recording and inform you to leave a number for another customer representative to contact you, only to inform you that they will self regulate and investigate themselves.

They seem to always find successful resolution which finds themselves in the right, without any proofs.

Then, to make matters worse, if you request a direct contact to the U.S. Department of Education to file grievance, well, they are privatized, meaning, there is no regulation or oversight of what the organization does.

So, to make a long story short, as this is obviously an issue far too complex for "The Elected Ones" to take on, or perhaps it is a matter of keeping campaign funds rolling in, here is the direct number to file a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education Ombudsman.

877-557-5875

The activities of Navient were so egregiously outlandish, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau had to file a complaint for a permanent injunction to stop this predatory, strong arming of getting blood from a stone.  

I believe it is nothing but a skimming scam to submit false claims in artificial services fees, just like every other privatized corporation does, to drain the Social Security Trust Fund.

What better way of destroying the intellectual and economic future of a nation!

Navient is nothing but another privatized hustle called false claims.

Oh, by the way, I would not advise a buy on its stock right about now.

Tell your story to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

File a complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Navient Pioneer Credit Recovery Complaint 2017 by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Whistleblowers Should Replace Regulators

U.S. Representative
Joe Courtney

In the spirit of deregulation, there seems to be a shift in the oversight authority back to the people.

U.S. Representative Joe Courtney has introduced the following Bill which has been referred to the U.S. House Committee on House, Education and the Workforce.

All I can do is cross my fingers that the Committee:

• Does not keep whistleblower powers exclusive to federal employees;

• Allow pro se standing through administrative remedies via referral coordination with EPA and IRS.  Make a community policing "court appointed" program for indigent whistleblowers to proceed with claims providing advocacy.  It is difficult for the indigent to access justice when your attorney breaks the seal of your case to work with the fraudfeasors and refuses to lift a finger to represent you in hopes the case is dismissed, with or without prejudice, because they know you will never be able to afford representation and you just gave them all the information to cover up these financial crimes. We possess the expertise as the original source, so listen to us; 

• End all the Rule 9b dilatory volley.  A fraud is a fraud.  Refer it out to an IG, Ethics or DOJ to stop wasting time on litigating legal semantics; and,

• Stop ignoring the desperately needed clean up with the crap about a state not being classified as an "individual" under the False Claims Act.   All this does is give a free pass to state and locally elected and appointed officials to use their offices for personal inurement with special federal powers of immunities to run taxpayer money-raping schemes through nonprofits into their re-election campaigns.

Come on, people, let us just keep it real and do what needs to be done to stop the dark money being siphoned through the black budget.

Pretty please, Pretty Preet?

If this does not get fast-tracked through Committee and both chambers, I am going to ethically castigate each and every official who is not in concurrence with me because each vote in opposition will be a red flag that they are engaging in fraudulent activities through their offices and campaigns.

If you want to get rid of regulations, then you better replace it with whistleblower empowerment protections. 

Every single federal department and agencies need whistleblower protections, including the States.

Period.

#Time2AuditGod

H.R.914 - To amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to expand coverage under the Act, to increase protections for whistleblowers, to increase penalties for high gravity violations, to adjust penalties for inflation, to provide rights for victims or their family members, and for other purposes.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS & CICILLINE: LATEST TRUMP TWO FOR ONE EXECUTIVE ORDER WOULD TIE THE NATION IN RED TAPE & HARM CONSUMERS

Washington, DC – House Judiciary Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) and  Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law Subcommittee Ranking Member David N. Cicilline (D-RI) released the following  statement after President Donald Trump signed an executive order to eliminate critical protections for consumers’ health and product safety, environmental protections, workplace safety, and consumer financial protections:

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

“Our Federal regulations create jobs and ensure the safety of our food, water and air are not undermined."

“This two for one Executive Order is a historic step in the wrong direction. By requiring that all Federal agencies eliminate two protections prior to adopting virtually every new rule—no matter how important or pressing—the Executive Order will practically guarantee a shutdown of the Federal government through administrative red tape."

“This measure is no different than requiring that two criminals are released for every arrest or that two stop signs are destroyed for every new one built."

“Simply put, the bureaucratic gridlock mandated through this sweeping example of Executive fiat will do little to help small businesses compete, create economic opportunity for American workers, or grow the economy."

“Every citizen who counts on the Federal government to be accountable, transparent, and responsive should be concerned by this unprecedented measure.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Feds Link Up To Bust Its First USDA Child Welfare Scheme

Well, well, well, look at what we have here.

Another joint partnership to stop child welfare fraud!

Now, I bet you thought I was going to attack these nefarious incorporated, non-taxable, child welfare entities, but, if you are familiar with my mission, you should know that I always seem to attain a more blanketed understanding of operations.

In this FBI press release, it is seen that the USDA has partnered with the IRS.

Drive through food bank distribution of the week for a family of 4.
(Industrial case of mustard, 2 cabbage, 4 butternut squash,pre-rotten tomatoes,
2 bags of rice, out-dated milk,and frozen-thawed-frozen-thawing chicken quarters.)

Learn more: Do Not Blame CPS, Blame Michigan
Stop Medicaid Fraud in Child Welfare 

I do not want to say much about this investigative mobilization but there are mechanisms which allow individuals, rather, original sources, without legal counsel, to actually participate in the enforcement of oversight.

This oversight I shall call a false claim

Basically, it works like this:

People set up schemes to get elected officials into office by funding their campaigns through child welfare scams because these scams are exempted and excluded from external scrutiny.

Then, these people, fraudfeasors as I prefer to call them, go ahead and ramrod some policies to cut and severe resources.

I like to refer to "cut and sever" as "diffuse and disrupt" for the purposes of taking over the land.  If you create the right economic policies in a geographic area, populations will either quickly die off or move out, whether by choice or condition.

The properties abandoned, forfeited and foreclosed, will eventually revert to an unregulated, privatized, non-taxable land bank, where the land will be parceled off to private speculators, domestic and foreign, including NGOs, to secure federal contracts to rebuild the infrastructure and population, of which "The Poors" will not be eligible to participate.

These are nothing more than economic attacks on these historically disparaged populations.

Then, when the need of these populations have reached a tantamount level of poverty, a crisis of child poverty measured through, in this instance, USDA weights, then it becomes reasonably simple to set up these charitable programs to help out these "poor kids with parents who feel entitled", or whatever the political flavor of "personal responsibility" rhetoric is of the day, in order to target and secure public and private funding.

As of this moment, I can only speak upon Michigan.

Michigan has a few of these active scams.  Here is one of them.

 Feeding America of West Michigan.

Feeding America is one of these USDA programs that intends to feed hungry children.  Here is how it works.

It charges local non-profits $0.18 a pound for food, claiming administrative costs, but here is the kicker, the food is donated with tax write-offs from secondary production companies, so the quality is, well, how can I say this...literally rotten.

Then, some of these local food banks are unable to raise enough money to afford the $0.18 a pound to feed their communities, leaving families to find other ways to "supplement" their SNAP benefits which have been cut, again, under the promoted guise of relying upon these food banks.

Q:  So why is it these food banks are not feeding hungry children as they claim to be?

A1:  Land banks and food banks are unregulated.

A2:  Poverty is a crime.

A3:  Social Impact Investments demand profitable returns.

A4:  The FBI has just now partnered with USDA and IRS on this.

Qui tam pro domino rege quam pro se ipso in hac parte sequitur

Much love to the #Superfans.

More to come...

Marianna Man Sentenced to Prison in Scheme to Steal USDA Funds Intended to Feed Hungry Children

LITTLE ROCK—Christopher R. Thyer, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Arkansas, announced Tuesday that United States District Court Judge D. Price Marshall Jr., sentenced James E. Franklin, Jr., 34, of Marianna, to prison for his role in a widespread scheme to steal money intended for feeding children in low income areas.

Judge Marshall sentenced Franklin, who pleaded guilty to conspiring to commit wire fraud on September 16, 2016, to 24 months’ imprisonment, to be followed by two years of supervised release. He was also ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $380,055.36.

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) feeding programs in Arkansas are administered through the Arkansas Department of Human Services (DHS). Sponsors who want to participate in the feeding programs must submit an application to DHS for approval. After they are approved, they can provide meals as part of the feeding programs, and they are reimbursed for the eligible meals they serve.

Franklin is the fourth defendant sentenced who was charged with involvement in a scheme to fraudulently obtain these USDA program funds intended to feed children in low income areas. Eight others have pleaded guilty and are awaiting sentencing. Jacqueline Mills, Dorothy Harper, and Anthony Waits are scheduled for trial on March 27, 2017, before United States District Court Judge James M. Moody, Jr.

Franklin was a sponsor for a feeding program through an organization called "JL&N Outreach." Franklin had two approved feeding site locations, one in Hughes, Arkansas and the other in Brinkley, Arkansas. Franklin claimed that he fed as many as 244 children a day in Hughes and as many as 287 children a day in Brinkley.  According to witnesses, no more than 10 children per day were fed in Brinkley and no more than 15 children per day were fed in Hughes.

Franklin was recruited by Anthony Waits. Waits’ wife, Gladys Waits, worked for DHS and approved Franklin’s application. Franklin paid Anthony Waits approximately 40% of the $380,055.36 Franklin received in the scheme.

The investigation is ongoing and is being conducted by the USDA–Office of Inspector General, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Internal Revenue Service–Criminal Investigations, and United States Marshals Service. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Jana K. Harris, Allison W. Bragg, and Cameron McCree.

If you are aware of any fraudulent activity regarding feeding programs, please email that information to USAARE.FeedingProgramFraud@usdoj.gov

Or, you can just hit me up.  Seriously.  I am sick of this shit.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS & JOHNSON RELEASE STATEMENTS & JUDICIARY DEM FACT SHEET ON GOP ANTI-REGULATORY AGENDA & WISH LIST FOR BIG BUSINESS

Washington, DC – During the first weeks of the 115^th Congress, Republicans are choosing to prioritize a series of anti-regulation bills that would empower Republicans to strip critical protections away from Americans. H.R. 5, the so-called Regulatory Accountability Act, would grind the rulemaking system to a halt while inviting regulatory capture through increased input from corporate interests, waste agency resources and taxpayer dollars, and do nothing to directly help small businesses. In doing so, H.R. 5 would seriously undermine critical protections across every regulated industry, including consumers’ health and product safety, environmental protections, workplace safety, and consumer financial protections.

House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) and Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law Ranking Member Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Jr. (D-GA) today released the following statements:

Dean of the U.S, House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

“Instead of wasting time on bad solutions for non-existent problems, we should be working tirelessly across party lines to find solutions to crushing student loan debt, gun violence, unemployment and stagnant wages,” said Conyers. “Unfortunately, House Republicans refuse to work on a bipartisan basis to reduce barriers to employment, even in the context of their anti-regulatory legislation. These same Republicans also refuse to work with Democrats on commonsense amendments to their legislation that would ensure that protections that create jobs and ensure the safety of our food, water and air are not undermined.”

Conyers continued, “Instead of working to support corporate interests through the GOP anti-regulatory agenda, Congress must focus on finding real solutions to real problems facing the nation, such as middle-class economic opportunity, gun violence prevention, the erosion of voting rights, and growing economic inequality.” 

“Once again, House Republicans' only ideas for growing the economy and creating jobs is to endanger countless regulatory protections under the guise of a so-called ‘jobs bill.’ They choose to ignore the fact that 15.6 million private sector jobs were created under the robust regulatory environment under the Obama administration,” said Johnson. “According to a recent Bloomberg report, only 0.3 percent of jobs eliminated last year were due to government regulation, far less than those lost due to other factors such as outsourcing and automation.”

On the House Judiciary Committee alone, House Republicans have held 33 anti-regulation hearings since the start of the 112th Congress, but not a single hearing in the 114^th or 115^thCongress on:

• Gun violence;
• Voting rights;
• The impact of overwhelming student loan debt on families and the economy;
• The mortgage foreclosure crisis, which still is hampering the economic recovery of millions of American families; or
• How we can better help struggling American families regain their financial stability.

A full fact sheet on H.R. 5 and the GOP Big Business Agenda is below.

FACT SHEET: GOP’S ANTI-REGULATORY AGENDA IS ONLY A “BETTER WAY” FOR BIG BUSINESS, NOT WORKING AMERICANS by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©