Yes, Bill Johnson has slithered into another secret division of DHS.
Johnson has abdicated to his trusty side-kick, Bruce Hoffman, who has
taken over the throne of omnipotence.
I am guessing, as I really do not feel like finding out where he went at
this particular moment, that he is doing something with child welfare
contracts.
Now, how did I come to this conclusion?
Well, the Madame Maura Corrigan has stepped down as DHS Director after
successfully running a game on the federal court monitor that "all is
well" in Michigan child welfare.
All is not well, not even close because it seems the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
has picked Michigan, under the Madame's leadership, to launch a pilot
model for privatizing the entire system of child welfare, or more
specifically, foster care. The pilot city is Grand Rapids and it has a
long, nasty, sordid history of snatching kids via bible thumping.
When I say "bible-thumping" I specifically mean the christian child placing agencies which are all Michigan non-profit corporations.
Michigan Legislature just seriously attempted to slam a Bill down the throats of the people
under the guise of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). This
Bill, mirrored from its namesake federal Act, was originally used as the
backbone for the Michigan Parental Rights Resolution which was
introduced for an Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. I worked on the
construction of the Bill.
The RFRA federal case was centered on a Child Protective Service case of
parents using certain plants with hallucinogenic properties in their
traditional, indigenous religious ceremonies. Parenting was
transmogrified into a religious belief overnight.
The Tea Party began to take roots
as a family economic movement and I was there to witness. It was built
off the desperation of parents who had their children legally kidnapped. These families became powerful catalysts for the extreme right wing to, predatorially, push through their "christian" subversive agendas. Look who launched the Tea Party on "God's economy" (Michele Bachmann's reference to children @ 4:30):
As few may not know, it takes 3/4ths of the States 7 years to have a
referendum to amend the Constitution. The Parental Rights Amendment did
not survive but RFRA did.
RFRA will take the same course as the Parental Rights Amendment, mark my
word. Also mark my words when I say that it just might steam roll the
national level and become an Amendment as there are a series of states
which have already signed on.
RFRA is not alone in its ride to becoming an Amendment. The Hobby Lobby
decision opened the flood gates for legal challenges to "religious
freedom" as corporations, legal persons, now have recognized religious
beliefs.
Michigan has introduced, sine die, major changes to its Non-Profit
Corporation Law. From a quick overview, I see it is now easier for a
not-for-profit to set up and transfer to a for-profit.
This got me thinking that timing of the shift in Michigan child welfare leadership is not a coincidence.
Charter schools do not provide special needs education but child welfare does and the money comes from Medicaid. The federal A+PLUS Act would give direct access to CPS in viewing school records, with no oversight, to generate more child welfare cases by providing special needs services.
Every corporation is about to hire a child and no one will stop this from being a nationally diffusable model.
As of this writing, the Michigan
Bureau of Adult and Children Licensing no longer has oversight of Grand
Rapid child placing agencies. Actually, no one has oversight as the
pilot program of privatization has been launched. The only way to file a
complaint/grievance is through the state court because, remember, a
corporation is a person, too, but soon with protected religious beliefs
and the ability to dissolve at the drop of a hat to a for-profit.
Children under the auspices of the state (ie. foster care, residential
institutions, juvenile justice, court child welfare cases) are not
calculated in the national child poverty numbers.
This is God's economic model to reduce child poverty.
For those of you who have not heard about the SCOTUS "Hobby Lobby" decision, here it is for your
SCOTUS Chief Justice John Roberts "divining" on
the Hobby Lobby opinion
reading enjoyment.
For those of you who dare not muddle through the legalize, which I must say, Justice Ruth Ginsburg's dissent was eloquently scathing, have fun.
The controversy at hand is not, or rather, should not, be centered on an all male majority "He-Man-Women-haters Club" nor should it be on a woman's ability to have equal access to necessary medicine and medical procedures similar to men as Viagra is covered for men.
The issue at hand, which has failed to see the light of the legal and political pundits, is child welfare.
Yes, the Hobby Lobby case is about child welfare.
Some years ago, 2007, I worked with Michigan House Republicans to craft a Resolution on protecting Parental Rights. This was taken to the federal level to be the Parental Rights Amendment.
The underlying base of the Parental Rights Amendment was the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).
RFRA had been successfully used in cases involving Child Protective Services improperly removing children from parents. The premise was, and is, parenting is a religious belief which bars government intervention, unless there is a "compelling governmental interest".
During the Michigan crafting period of its Parental Rights Resolution, the state was in its darkest days of defalcation of federal funding of child welfare. It was a free-for-all where anyone who had a child welfare contract with the state could and would double, triple, phantom-bill, typically, Medicaid.
Court cases were fictitious whereby the family court policy of Lincoln Hall of Justice, under leadership of, then, Referee Kelly Ann Ramsey and Judge Judy Hartsfield where children, as young as 2 years of age, were being prosecuted as juvenile delinquents and contemporaneously adjudicatedaswards of the court for foster care placement without a single person (no attorney, no parent, no Assistant Attorney General, no human being) ever being in the courtroom because all the orders were "rubber stamped". Parents were tried of child abuse where there were never any charges nor pleas nor evidence entered into the record. (emphasis added.)
The Democratic leadership of Wayne County refused to publicly address the issue because money was being funneled to election campaigns via organizations like Black Family Development and even Michigan Supreme Court Justice Maura Corrigan (now, DHS Director).
West Michigan Republicans, many evangelical Christians, began to examine the application of RFRA into numerous other areas under the guise of economic prosperity of the family through the promotion of Christian values.
Now, the power of RFRA applications have been honed to parsimoniously craft a national agenda of child welfare via the Hobby Lobby.
Unbeknownst to the anti-abortion, pro-life, advocates, their rally cry to "save the babies" in basted in the juices of "compassionate cleansing". This is the advocacy for children of poor, who are typically cognitively and psychologically developmentally disabled, to become productive, low wage, future workers of corporations and purge the human gene pool by naturally controlling human reproduction through the installation of "good Christian values" of abstinence, marriage and reducing life expectancy with chemical constraints of psychotropic medications, complete with social repression of sexual orientation, creativity and personal expression.
The logic of future cheap labor
I consider it social eugenics to create a cheap labor force for global competition in the free market. The literal interpretation of the "best interests of the child" is to reap the future interest of workforce productivity from the investment in the human capital of the babies who are "saved". Christian assimilation.
It begins with the removal of the child from the legal custody of the parent, either in vitro or ex vitro.
The Christian campaign of "saving the child" begins with the codification of a zygote/fetus for personhood. The grant of legal custody and guardianship of the child is quickly being reclaimed as chattel as part of the national platform for the conservative movement but what is even more foreshadowing of this ruling is the possibility of that grant at the moment of conception. This is the thrust of religious fervor behind the pro life movement. "
If a woman is to abort or prevent, then her legal rights to the child have defaulted to the state. The promotion of child protective services, eventually, under the theory of Christian compassion, removes that child from its human host as economic preservation of future productivity in human capital as the likelihood of that child growing up to pay taxes is not statistically significant according to conservative think tanks.
This conservation of Christian values revisits an era of err for which I identify as the beginning of civil rights, specifically the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The Emancipation Proclamation "erred" as it did not address the future grant of custody and guardianship of posterity.
Children are acknowledged in the U.S. Constitution as "our posterity" and this is what this precursive ruling addresses: the "peculiar institution" of child welfare, in the name of a Christian God.
Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.
WASHINGTON - Yesterday, House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet Ranking Member Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), House Education and Workforce Committee Ranking Member Bobby Scott (D-VA) and House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice Ranking Member Steve Cohen (D-TN) issued a letter to U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch asking the Department of Justice (DOJ) to follow-up on a request to instruct the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) to review and reconsider an opinion issued on June 29, 2007. The opinion has been interpreted to permit federally funded faith-based organizations to use the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) to override statutory employment nondiscrimination laws.
The 2007 opinion, based on flawed analysis, found that RFRA was “reasonably construed” to permit World Vision, a religiously-affiliated federal grant recipient, to refuse to hire non-coreligionists for jobs that were funded by taxpayer money even though the statute governing the grant explicitly prohibited such religious hiring discrimination.
In the letter, the Members express that they are “…deeply concerned that the OLC opinion is being cited with increasing frequency to protect discriminatory employment practices in cases beyond the specific grant at issue in the opinion.” The letter continues, “while the OLC opinion specified that its conclusion was ‘limited to the issuance of this grant to World Vision,’ it has since been used to justify hiring discrimination practices in other Justice Department programs such as the Violence Against Women Act, and in programs run by other federal agencies.”
“Although the OLC opinion is now more than eight and half years old, it remains problematic because it continues to be cited to justify blanket exemptions to nondiscrimination provisions in federally-funded programs,” said the lawmakers.
The Embryo Adoption Public Awareness Campaign was first funded by Congress in fiscal year 2002. The original purpose of the program was to increase public awareness of the existence of a large number of human embryos remaining after in vitro fertilization procedures, some of which might be available for adoption by infertile couples. In fiscal year 2008, Congress expanded the scope of the program to include interventions that provided “medical and administrative services” to individuals and couples in order to facilitate the adoption and donation of embryos for the purpose of family formation. P4
Some non-Federal entities have
expressed concerns that requiring compliance with certain non-statutory requirements of
those paragraphs violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), 42 U.S.C. §
2000bb, et seq., or the U.S. Constitution, exceeds the Department’s statutory authority, or
reduces the effectiveness of programs, for example, by reducing foster care placements in
the Title IV-E program of HHS’s Administration for Children and Families. p5.
In this proposed rule, the American University, Beirut, and the World Health
Organization are exempted specifically from the indirect-cost-rate limitation because they
are eligible for negotiated facilities and administration (F&A) cost reimbursement.
TRASNLATION: FRAUD. CHILDREN'S FAKE ASS FOREIGN CHILD WELFARE NGOs AND THEIR FAKE ASS CHILDREN'S TRUST FUNDS RUNNING CHILD WELFARE PROPAGANDA CAMPAIGNS ALL THE DAMN TIME BECAUSE THE COST REIMBURSEMENT IS THROUGH MEDICAID AND LOTS AND LOTS OF STUPID PREDICTIVE MODELING CRAP RESEARCH GRANTS FOR FOREIGN UNIVERSITIES, SUCH AS LISTED ABOVE, ARE DOING ON TINY HUMANS. SEE SAM BROWNBACK. EMPHASIS ADDED.
This
proposed restriction on indirect costs, as indicated by 45 CFR 75.101, would flow down
to subawards and subrecipients. The Department recognizes that this provision could be
interpreted as having a financial impact on small entities. These limits, however, have
been operational since the publication of the Final Rule, and therefore grantees would not
need to make any changes to their current practice in response to this rulemaking.
Washington D.C., Nov 1, 2019 / 02:00 pm (CNA).- The Trump administration has announced a change to federal rules to preserve federal funding of faith-based adoption agencies, regardless of their views on same-sex marriage.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced Nov. 1 that it would change its enforcement of previous regulations and propose a new rule, allowing faith-based adoption agencies to continue receiving federal funding while not having to match children with same-sex couples against their religious mission.
HHS said it would revise a 2016 rule that conditioned federal funding of child welfare agencies upon their matching children with same-sex couples.
The U.S. bishops’ conference (USCCB) praised the change in a statement released on Friday.
“To restrict faith-based organizations’ work by infringing on religious freedom – as the 2016 rule threatened to do - is unfair and serves no one, especially the children in need of these services,” said a joint statement by Bishop Frank Dewane of Venice, Florida, chair of the USCCB Domestic Justice and Human Development committee, Bishop James Conley of Lincoln, chair of the USCCB Subcommittee for the Promotion and Defense of Marriage, and Bishop Robert McManus of Worcester, Massachusetts, chair of the USCCB Committee for Religious Liberty.
The previous regulation “threatened to shut out faith-based social service providers, namely adoption and foster care agencies that respect a child’s right to a mother and a father,” the bishops said.
The announcement comes in the middle of a “foster care crisis” in which faith-based adoption agencies will play a critical role in placing children with families, religious freedom advocates said.
“It is just as important today to continue fighting so that vulnerable children will have all hands on deck in the midst of a nationwide foster care crisis,” said Lori Windham, senior counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty.
“Every child deserves a chance to be raised in a loving home,” said Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Zack Pruitt said, noting that there are more than 400,000 children in the foster care system and 100,000 eligible for adoption. HHS’s action “offers hope for children, more options for birth mothers, support for families, and increased flexibility for states seeking to alleviate real human need,” he said.
However, the administration’s proposed rule “would only fix part of the problem,” Windham tweeted, as faith-based agencies also face hostility from state and local governments and thus “still need help from SCOTUS.”
Becket represents several entities affected by the Obama administration regulation and similar state and local efforts to push child welfare agencies to place children with same-sex couples.
In a press release on Friday morning, HHS said it would stop enforcing certain regulatory provisions for administering grants, due to a problematic interpretation of them by the Obama administration.
The federal agency also issued a proposed rule revising part of a 2016 Obama-era regulation, to better protect faith-based adoption agencies.
The rule, HHS said, would ensure respect for civil rights while protecting religious freedom and “eliminating regulatory burden” on “the free exercise of religion”; it would do so by requiring grant recipients to comply with existing anti-discrimination laws passed and religious freedom laws that have been passed by Congress, while also requiring HHS to comply with relevant Supreme Court decisions.
Faith-based adoption agencies have had to contend with efforts at the federal, state, and local levels that conditioned public funding on the agencies placing children with same-sex couples in violation of their religious mission.
In Michigan, Catholic Charities West Michigan—represented by ADF—brought a federal lawsuit against the state for withholding funding from faith-based adoption agencies over their stances on marriage. A federal court recently blocked the Obama-era regulation from going into effect in a case involving St. Vincent Catholic Charities and a family looking to adopt, represented by Becket.
“Both the federal government and a federal court have now recognized that discrimination against faith-based agencies seeking to serve those most in need should not be tolerated. We hope that state and local governments will follow suit,” Windham said.
There are several federal laws which are relevant to nondiscrimination in the adoption and foster care system.
These include Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which forbids discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in programs of child welfare agencies and state courts. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 forbids sex discrimination in federally-funded education programs; other laws prohibit discrimination for age and disability.
The Obama administration interpreted existing law to forbid discrimination in the child welfare system not only on basis of sex, but sexual orientation. Thus, it began taking action against adoption agencies that did not place children with same-sex couples, on the grounds that they were discriminating against an individual’s sexual orientation.
Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.) introduced an amendment in a 2018 funding bill to withhold some HHS funding of states that would not allow faith-based organizations to carry out their religious mission in child welfare. The amendment was removed from the legislation before a final House vote.
Adoption agencies have also been facing adverse action from states which have anti-discrimination laws.
In Massachusetts, Catholic Charities of the Boston Archdiocese stopped its adoption services in 2006 after the state legalized same-sex marriage. Catholic Charities in California and Illinois also stopped their adoption services in 2006 and 2011, respectively.
In Illinois, the bishops had said that the state “made it financially impossible for our agencies to continue to provide these services,” after the state legalized same-sex marriage and required adoption agencies to pair children with same-sex couples.
In 2018, the city of Philadelphia stopped placing adoptive children with Catholic Social Services, only days after calling for 300 new families to adopt foster children.
The city faces a lawsuit by several foster mothers for its decision to stop working with Catholic Social Services, and on Nov. 15, the Supreme Court will decide whether or not to grant review in Fulton v. Philadelphia.
Speaking of grant announcements, a funny thing happened while searching for the Federal Registry Announcement for public comments, where I shall, in the Spirit of the Celestial Goddess of the Woodshed, perform the perfection of prayers for the heavens to fall, I found this fun little Faith Based Funding grant of the Office of Population Control for the search of hosts to gestate a corporation's moveable chattel in the form of embryos.
The Embryo Adoption Public Awareness Campaign was first funded by Congress in fiscal year 2002. The original purpose of the program was to increase public awareness of the existence of a large number of human embryos remaining after in vitro fertilization procedures, some of which might be available for adoption by infertile couples. In fiscal year 2008, Congress expanded the scope of the program to include interventions that provided “medical and administrative services” to individuals and couples in order to facilitate the adoption and donation of embryos for the purpose of family formation.
The National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) has collected information over the past several years regarding the behaviors and access to health services of females and males within the United States of America related to family formation and reproductive health. Data from the 2012 NSFG release (which received partial support from the Embryo Adoption Awareness program) suggested that nearly two-thirds of U.S. women of reproductive age knew of embryo adoption/donation as a method of family formation. Preliminary analysis from more recent studies indicate that awareness continues to increase. Building upon the public’s awareness, in 2016, OPA supported a small but in-depth study of obstetrician/gynecologists’ knowledge and practices regarding embryo adoption/donation. Though awareness of embryo adoption/donation was nearly universal among the study participants, none of them had ever offered education and counseling on embryo adoption/donation nor suggested it to a patient.
Nadler: The Trump Administration is turning an office dedicated to ending discrimination into an office designed to protect those who would discriminate
Washington, D.C. – Today, House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) released the following statement denouncing the Trump Administration’s decision to reorganize the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Office of Civil Rights (OCR) to focus on defending health care workers who refuse—because of their personal moral and religious beliefs—to care for patients based on their sexual orientation, gender identity, or reproductive health choices:
“The Trump Administration’s announcement today is an attack on the values this country should stand for. This decision by HHS puts the full weight of the federal government behind those who discriminate against men and women at their most vulnerable moments.
“In 1993, I was a leader in passing the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), and I have long been an outspoken advocate for religious freedom. But RFRA was designed as a shield, not a sword. The law is intended to protect personal religious practices and beliefs from government interference, not grant carte blanche for those in positions of authority to impose their own beliefs on others. This new policy has no constitutional or moral basis in our country.
“Today’s announcement isn’t about religious freedom. It’s about creating a system where LGBTQ people are discriminated against, women are refused reproductive care, and every American’s personal health care decisions are second guessed and ignored based on their provider’s personal views – including in federally funded programs. With this reorganization, the Trump Administration is turning an office dedicated to ending discrimination in health care into an office designed to enable those who would discriminate.
“The Constitution clearly protects religious beliefs and practices, but it also ensures that every American is treated equally under the law. President Trump, Acting Secretary Hargan, and OCR Director Serevino would do well to remember that.”
Isn’t it interesting that a reporter with the last name of “Justice” is the one who investigated the children of Judge John Roberts? Referring to a report that New York Times investigative reporter Glen Justice was prying into the private adoption records of Roberts’ two children, radio talk-show host Kevin McCullough declared that “Every adoptive parent reading this will be understandably outraged, and they should be. Every decent human being in every decent family across this nation should speak up. And every person subscribing to the New York Times should think about whether or not they want to continue to do so.”
In a column carried by Illinoisleader.com, McCullough said, “The reason that such tactics get played out over and over is because the Times and other elements of the liberal dominated media feel they will suffer no foul consequence in doing so. Their idea is journalism has little to do with reporting the facts as much as it has to do with Democratic Party-friendly witch hunts that can be carried out without indictment for any wrongdoing. By conducting such an inquiry into the personal and private lives of Supreme Court nominee Roberts, his wife and the process they went through to become parents, the Times seems to be setting a new low-like they have been prone to in recent years-in its lack of journalistic standards.”
The National Council for Adoption issued a statement denouncing, “in the strongest possible terms, the shocking decision of the New York Times to investigate the adoption records of Justice John Roberts’ two young children. The adoption community is outraged that, for obviously political reasons, the Times has targeted the very private circumstances, motivations, and processes by which the Roberts became parents.
But Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Vice Chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, said she was “appalled to learn that reporters for the New York Times had started an investigation into the adoption records of U.S. Supreme Court nominee John Roberts and his wife. Simple decency dictates that some boundaries should be placed on inquiries into the private lives of public figures by interest groups and the news media.”
She added, “In my view, this inquiry by the Times-no matter how preliminary the newspaper now says it was-steps over that boundary line. I note the paper initially claimed this misstep was inadvertent. But it has now been reported that the newspaper consulted its lawyers to determine ways to unseal court adoption records of the Roberts family. In my view, this is reprehensible.”
Hutchison said this was not the first time that coverage of Roberts went “over the line.” She explained that she was disgusted by a half-page Washington Post story “deriding the apparel worn by the Roberts children when their father’s nomination was announced at the White House.” She noted that the Los Angeles Times “ran a lengthy story examining private activities of Mrs. Roberts that were largely irrelevant to her husband’s nomination.”
Hutchison concluded, “I hope everyone involved in the confirmation process will take a deep breath and consider carefully the fine line between legitimate background inquiries and invasion of privacy in such cases. In the meantime, I will encourage the Congressional Coalition on Adoption, of which I’m a member, to take a position opposing inquiries such as those started by the New York Times.”
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, commented on the Times inquiry by saying that “?it should be agreed by all, especially Democrats and newspapers sympathetic to Democratic causes, that attacking family is repugnant. What kind of people would assault Judge Roberts through his children? What kind of people would publish vicious attacks on his little boy and little girl for how they were dressed? What kind of people would try to get at a judicial nominee because of the occupation or work of their spouse? Or attempt to dredge up damaging material through private adoption records? The unfortunate answer is they are the kind of people who have been picking our judges for years. They are also the people who will be picking our future judges unless we stay active today.”
These “people” are mostly in the media. They do these things because they are not being held accountable.
If I close my eyes really, really hard, I can recall Emperor Pence signing the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), because it came out Michigan and I just happen to know one of the writers, super duper, really well, which brings me to a dream sequence of why the Detroit Economic Club and the Michigan Economic Development Authority embraced him, the glorious leader of the Indiana Economic Development Authority, so warmly, but hey, what do I know?
I know nothing because the case is still under seal.
What I do know is that I know about the qui tam and the False Claims Act, when dealing with Medicaid Fraud in Child Welfare and the Indianapolis Land Bank, including its marvelous artifices & machinations of stealin' the children, land & votes, just like the Detroit Land Bank Authority.
I also know that you cannot be prosecuted for Medicaid Fraud in Child Welfare, under the FCA when you use your RFRA get out of jail for stealin' card when you do it in the name of the tax exempt god, because that is why it was created.
The United States has filed a complaint against Community Health Network Inc. (Community) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, the Department of Justice announced today. Community, an integrated health care system in central Indiana, is alleged to have violated the Stark Law and thereby submitted false claims to the Medicare program.
The Stark Law prohibits a hospital from billing Medicare for services referred by a physician with whom the hospital has an improper financial relationship that does not meet any statutory or regulatory exception. The government’s complaint alleges that Community had employment relationships with a number of physicians that did not meet any Stark Law exception because the compensation Community paid to the physicians was well above fair market value and because Community conditioned paying bonuses on physicians achieving a minimum target of referral revenues to the hospital. The complaint alleges that Community received referrals from these physicians in violation of the Stark Law and submitted claims to Medicare knowing that the claims for those referred services were not eligible for payment.
“Improper financial relationships between hospitals and physicians corrupt clinical decision-making, threaten patient care, and ultimately drive up Medicare costs,” said Assistant Attorney General Jody Hunt of the Department of Justice’s Civil Division. “We are committed to eliminating these improper inducements and thereby ensuring the Medicare program remains fiscally sound to serve our nation’s senior citizens.”
“Our goal at the U.S. Attorney’s Office is to serve the citizens and help ensure safety in their communities,” said U.S. Attorney Josh Minkler for the Southern District of Indiana. “Hospitals are responsible for not only the health and well-being of their patients, but are also required to establish a compliance program in order to protect against improper payments, fraud and abuse as a condition of enrollment in the Medicare program.”
The United States filed its complaint in a lawsuit originally filed under the qui tam or whistleblower provisions of the False Claims Act, which allow private parties to file suit on behalf of the United States for false claims and to receive a share of any recovery. The Act permits the United States to intervene and take over the lawsuit, as it has done here in part. Those who violate the Act are subject to treble damages and applicable penalties.
The government’s resolution of this
matter illustrates the government’s emphasis on combating health care fraud. One of the most powerful tools in this effort is the False Claims Act. Tips and complaints from all sources about potential fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement, can be reported to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), at 800-HHS-TIPS (800-447-8477).
This case is being handled by the Justice Department’s Civil Division and the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Indiana, with assistance from the Office of Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services. The case is captioned United States and the State of Indiana ex rel. Thomas Fischer v. Community Health Network, Inc., et al. No. 1:14-cv-1215 (RLY-DKL) (S.D. Ind.).
The claims in which the United States has intervened are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.
The year 2020 marks the 150th anniversary of the Department of Justice. Learn more about the history of our agency at www.Justice.gov/Celebrating150Years.
The State of Alaska is publishing information from the statewide accounting system on the web. This is part of a national trend for governments to develop websites that allow constituents to view financial information in searchable formats. Such websites are widely considered to improve transparency into the financial operations of government.
Governor Palin supported this trend, and as a result, this website was created. Governor Parnell has demonstrated his strong support by ensuring the website stays highly visible. It includes:
All vendors and grantees who received at least one payment of $1,000 or more in the current fiscal year through the end of January 2010. Individual payments of less than $1,000 are not included.
Information presented includes the name and location of the vendor or grantee, the purpose of the payment, and the department that requested it.
Payment information is aggregated. All payments of $1,000 or more are included, but amounts presented may be lower when payments are issued for more than one purpose.
Payments from certain payment systems have been excluded based on a confidentiality analysis performed by the Department of Law.
These "certain" exceptions are centered on programs which receive federal funding. A quick look at this list will show that all accounting in child welfare is excluded. That's right, there is no possible way for anyone, not even the State Auditor Generals, to look at the billing practices in child welfare.
Now, how's that for transparency?
Of course, there are those who will aver that state honor systems are part and parcel of a federalistic system, and that states exclude child welfare from public scrutiny to "further a compelling governmental interest."
If I am not mistaken, "furthering a compelling governmental interest" seems to mirror the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) of 1993. In the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling by Chief Justice Roberts (546 U.S. 418, 2006) the Court emphasized that Congress had constructed "a workable test for striking sensible balances between religious liberty and competing prior governmental interests" (42 U.S.C. 2000bb et seq.)
Multiple prong tests for strict scrutiny have been legally constructed to determine whether an interest is a compelling governmental interest, the defenses, as well as the remedies throughout the states, in respect to RFRA. The same may be applied to public exceptions, or Freedom of Information Act exclusions and exemptions, that only State Attorneys General are granted with the power to strictly scrutinize what is and what furthers a compelling governmental interest.
It is the duty of the State Attorney General to protect the State and its citizens. Exposing fraud in the child welfare industry would devastate state general funds and cut off federal funding streams for lack of compliance.
Nine Exemptions
Exemption One: Classified national defense and foreign relations information. Exemption Two: Internal agency personnel rules and practices. Exemption Three: Information that is prohibited from disclosure by another federal law. Exemption Four: Trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person that is privileged or confidential. Exemption Five: Inter-agency or intra-agency memoranda or letters that are protected by legal privileges. Exemption Six: Personnel, medical, financial, and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Exemption Seven: Certain types of information compiled for law enforcement purposes. Exemption Eight: Records that are contained in or related to examination, operating, or condition reports prepared by, on behalf of, or for the use of any agency responsible for the regulation or supervision of financial institutions. Exemption Nine: Geological and geophysical information and data, including maps, concerning wells.
Three Exclusions
(c)(1) Exclusion: Subject of a criminal investigation or proceeding is unaware of the existence of records concerning the pending investigation or proceeding and disclosure of such records would interfere with the investigation or proceeding. (c)(2) Exclusion: Informant records maintained by a criminal law enforcement agency and the individual's status as an informant is not known. (c)(3) Exclusion: Existence of FBI foreign intelligence, counterintelligence or international terrorism records are classified fact.
Child Welfare qualifies for each and every exemption and exclusion, which I have previously published. Fraud, in whatever form it is recognized, has gone through an intellectual metamorphosis to become an established constitutional right as a religious freedom. Simply put, fraud is now a First Amendment Right of privatized, contractual corporate individuals in child welfare and it is the obligation of the States, and every elected official who has signed on in support the "so-called parental rights" amendment, to further the compelling governmental interest of hiding all evidence of child welfare fraud.
In the spirit of political mockery, I shall resort to my typical, palatable ridicule, in the color of .
Spokesperson for Michigan Faith-based child welfare agencies
fuchsia
Adoption agencies can claim religious objection LANSING – Faith-based adoption agencies would be allowed to refuse to serve prospective parents, like same-sex or unmarried couples, if doing so would go against their religious beliefs under a package of bills that passed the state Senate on Wednesday.
Faith-based adoption agencies, along with their in-house child placing agencies, would be allowed to continue its practices of excalated billing to keep children in foster care placements longer, if doing so would maximize revenues which is the corre of their religious beliefs.
The 26-12 vote comes as the U.S. Supreme Court is on the verge of ruling later this month on whether same-sex marriages should be legal in Michigan and several other states.
The majority, all 26 Senators who voted for this legislation have pleased their political campaign contributors to ensure a bright, and prosperous political future.
Critics of the bills have derided the legislation as state-sanctioned discrimination — especially because many of the faith-based agencies receive public funding from the state. But supporters say it will help keep all options open for adoptive parents, while not forcing the agencies to compromise their principles for fear of legal retaliation or face closure because of a loss of state funding.
I am criticizing the bills because the legislation violates the current federal settlement agreement of family placements and blatantly spurns federal policies in child welfare. The Bills will thwart any legal retaliation and agency closing because it creates another veil of a pseudo-immunity when it comes to fraudulent billing practices. Besides, crushing a child's spirit by telling them they cannot be adopted by people they may well already know and love will help the adoption agencies when increasing the billing for psychotropic drugs to make the kid stop crying.
In the 2014-15 budget year, $19.9 million in state and federal funds went toward supporting agencies for adoption and foster care services, according to the state of Human Services. Nearly $10 million of that total went to faith-based agencies that would be covered under the religious objection bills.
State contracts in child welfaree have no bidding process, no audit, no compliance review, no sanctions, no referrals for investigation, no contractual disbarment, no prosecution, and no recovery of fraudulent billing. As the state continues its path of privitization, which has demonstratingly, failed miserably in Kansas, the legislation is only a cover up for the egregious practices done to children in the name of God, which keeps the federal court monitoring in the dark of why it needs to continue to be under the aegis of the feds.
"If they close their doors, I don't know what we'll do with all the children," said Sen. Rick Jones, R-Grand Ledge. "This is a real threat."
What to do with all the children? Here is a revelutionary idea...place them with people who care about them.
Sen. Tom Casperson, R-Escanaba, quoted scripture, saying Jesus told a woman accused of adultery, " 'Go and sin no more.' He called it out. He didn't just accept it and say live however you want. The Creator is pretty clear on certain things." Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones. -- Psalm 137:9
But opponents said the bills legalize discrimination against the LGBT communities, as well as unmarried couples.
Argumentative rouse. The Bills promote cloak and dagger rhetoric to cover up fraudulent billing and the horrific treatment of children in foster care to hoodwink Judge Nancy Edmunds to release the state from federal monitoring.
"These RFRA (Religious Freedom Restoration Act) adoption bills are the most egregious example of religious conservatism run amok in our government," said Sen. Coleman Young, D-Detroit. "Children are in desperate need of stable and loving homes. And today, we're slashing those opportunities because of archaic, closed-minded thinking."
The purpose of RFRA is to lay claim on the Social Security Trust fund for private investment off the poor. Period. I know. I worked on it.
Other Democrats said the timing of the Senate action on the bill is clear.
"Similar laws are being passed to push back against the eventual legalization of same-sex marriage," Sen. Curtis Hertel Jr., D-East Lansing. "You're once again on the wrong side of history."
These religious-based organizations are attempting to make history by rewriting it.
Democrats tried to get eight amendments passed that would: require faith-based agencies to provide their policies in writing to potential clients, as well on their websites and displayed in their facilities and comply with state and federal civil rights laws; prohibit adoption agencies that receive more than $500,000 in state funding from being able to use the religious objection argument; allow for second parent adoptions for unmarried couples. All the amendments failed.
Denying due process, violating federal policies, ignoring civil rights of children. For the aforementioned reasons, alone, Michigan should remain under federal court oversight of its child welfare.
The three bills passed the House last month on mostly party-line votes. The Senate version includes a requirement that faith-based adoption agencies provide references to other agencies if they refuse service to prospective parents. So the bill will have to go back to the House for concurrence.
Let us just see if Democratic leadership can come up with a plan to toll the Bills sine die. After all, recess of the House is coming up, quickly.
But Gov. Rick Snyder has been coy about whether he'll support the bills if they reach his desk. He said that the adoption bills would need further review and that he's in favor of children being adopted by "loving families" and "loving parents." He didn't specify if that included same-sex couples.
Synder is well aware of the percarious situation the state is in with its federal settlement agreement.
He has said he will veto a Religious Freedom Restoration Act — which caused a furor in Indiana and Arkansas recently — without an expansion of the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act to include the LGBT community.
Without the expansion, these child welfare agencies can now, not olny not hire and terminate an individual based upon their life, but ensure they can bill Meidicaid for all the LBGT children, or the children who engage in sexual activity with other children in foster care to "pray the gay away".
That bill would provide a legal defense for businesses who are subject to action by the state for refusing services to individuals based on their religious beliefs.
BINGO! Michigan found a way to create a legal defense fund for these religious child placing agencies to be defended from prosecution of federal fraud and civil rights violations. #Time2AuditGod
The following is a snapshot in time of the discussion chat during the hearing.
I have chosen not to identify the posters as it will be much more fun to figure out which comments are my own.
As this is the prelude to parental rights, I thought it only proper to do it in one of my genres of choice,, in the spirit of Da Dialetica, with a side of spicy dipping sauce.
This is about Medicaid fraud in child welfare, but Judiciary will not tell you that, being all busy trying to find out what is in the Mueller Report, and all.
Enjoy the pretty man looking over everyone's right shoulder.
Happy Child Abuse Propaganda Month!
FUN FACT! DNA & RNA have no gender phenotype,
Now, they are talking about "trans" kids and sports....yet nothing about kids being trafficked through these Title IX programs from overseas. Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.........
Oh my, Judiciary is talking "gender identity" medical stuff in winning races. Weeeeeeeeeeeee......
I propose a bill to prove your sexual orientation by submitting video evidence to the courts,
Aw man, you seriously want to drag the Dark Web into this realm? There are things you can't unsee...removing eyes doesn't help and neither does injecting bleach into the brain. Think we only have 52 genders now?
I hate to even consider what may be there......
Collins is talking about the sports doctors administrating hormone injections when needed to kids.
They are talking about child protection. How about stop labeling and love the body you were given?
This is covering up the epigenetic research they do on kids.
Zoe is asking the pastor for Southern Baptist take on LBQRSTUV.
Ok, I guess I have to take a tally of how many times they drop MLK. We are up to 2.
The reverend spoke of race and sex being the same....through a story of a story that was told to him by his daddy about MLK.
Gender Identity Disorder?
How about just letting someone be what they want instead of forcing labels...that they use for predictive modeling crap..
The prefrontal cortex for decision making and critical thinking skills ...isn't fully developed in children.
And To alter them with hormones before 18, is child abuse.
They are talking about using kids for T-level research.
Oh don't get me started on the threats CRISPR poses.....screw superpowers.....let's talk cascade effect from altering just one gene......they have NO clue exactly what they are doing. To a large degree they have a very basic understanding but long term....no way.
Gohmert says, "Only women carry children".. Well that is not true. We can produce humans outside the womb. HA! 46th allelal default
To possess is to own as it's cargo when you breech the waters of birth...
Faith Based is going to lose money if they accept LBQRSTUV. I told you. This is about chattel law. Property law is gender specific.
Hakeem did not talk about pregnancy discrimination.
I got another gender discrimination issue. Child Support, Title IVD is a male program.
OOOOOOOOOOOOO Nadler is getting feisty
He’s very nervous! He won’t allow anything that hurts HIS defense!
He has his crew in his office coordinating responses with HQ. I am waiting to see if he calls for bathroom breaks to go get coaching from #perkinscoiesucks
They are using RFRA as a reason to stop the LBQRSTUV.
ALL of the earmarks are being hit for this hearing to open the door for trafficking tiny humans.
McClintock rocked by asking why society regulates who people should dress and act.
This is the second congressional testimony from this chick. I have to find her name. Do you know the likelihood of one person being the go to person on a subject matter? This is personal for her, not for humanity.
Ha! That’s right mr McClintock—the questions are coming in a way that don’t makes sense but it does if you want to shape a defense.
Raskin is naming great members of Judiciary who have stood up for civil rights....but fails to name the one man he used to follow around like a puppy dog.
Raskin says this will help children in adoption. Huh?
Raskin is pushing adoption. I will thrash him. Listen to him talking about child placement.
moral discovery?? Whew
Raskin is pushing foster care. I want to jump through my computer and smack him for pushing adoption.
That’s my local DA’s mentor who is pushing for juvenile court- at this point I don’t think I could recognize what a normal justice system would look like
We just took our 6th grader out of public school- she couldn’t take constantly being confronted about her “preferred pronoun” by teachers- it was really f’ing with her head- she said to us “ I have the right to be a kid!” -way too young for this - it’s morphed into calling a boy who wants to be called her a he = hate speech GMAFB
There are only 2 genders. Asshole and Non-asshole. The spirit has no gender. The US is a very dumb nation.
Keep dropping your hearfilled comments and observations. I will be doing a full report on the "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) hearing. I already tweeted so they know it is coming. I like to watch them in my stats.
MLK mentions tally update: 7
does she mean her daughter is or is not gay? Nonconformist? Neutrality
All of this is so ironic, how they love to hear themselves , investigate each other etc- and never accountable for what they profit from- meanwhile there’s barely a shred of justice, understanding or sympathy for people at your local court house🙄
Not boys vs. girls....thems vs. thems these days.
All these protected classes do it lead to discrimination against others. The Constitution is very clear....equal protection under the laws.
I think she’s admitting she’s clueless
I think there are two shows playing simultaneously.
The boys vs girls are the hidden ones. Front and center are the thems vs thems/those. Nonconformists vs traditionalists
Jayapal is crying because she only found out 2 years ago that her 22 year old son was gay. She is a horrible mother.....or just really dumb. It is your child! You know before they can talk and walk.
Why is she crying, like she is embarrassed?
It will not stop. These witnesses are begging for HBCU protections. HBCUs have to stop stealin' first.
Her Flatulent Boviness expels words from her mouth......
Interesting....someone in the chat mentioned Lupron being used as a hormone blocker in kids and reminded folks it is a pallative prostate cancer med.
Kiddy lab rats
Start preaching.
Epigenetics
Even throwing out Nazis! Geesch!
I told you.....#coloredrevolution
Does no one understand "equal protections?" Get rid of protected classes because that is biased and racist and anti-american. I don't see "the poors" getting such elaborate protections.
Not even close.
This hearing was set up to push NLP in the re-engineering of child welfare. That chick is the "go-to" gal to push propaganda for profit because she is highly deficient in any legal basis of chattel law. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuro-linguistic_programming
have been excluded based on a confidentiality analysis performed by the Department of Law.