Child Support Enforcement A Fraud

Started by woof, Aug 04, 2006, 06:19 AM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down


Child Support Enforcement A Fraud
By Bruce Eden

After reading the article "NYS Child Support Collections Top $1.5 Billion"
(Feb. 25, 2006), the words that come to mind are "fraud", "scam",
"extortion", "racketeering" and "government oppression".

The state talks a good story about how all the increased child support
enforcement and collections benefits the children. This is pure fantasy. The
monies that the state awards, enforces and collects is directly proportional
to how much it receives from the federal government as incentive
reimbursement funding.

And that amount is in the several hundreds of millions of dollars. The
monies that the state receives for child support enforcement has no strings
attached. The state uses this funding to bolster their state employee and
judicial pension plans. Sounds like a massive conflict of interest and
criminal conspiracy to me. The U.S. Supreme Court held in Tumey v. Ohio,
Ward v. Monroeville and Gibson v. Berryhill that judges cannot sit on cases
where they have a pecuniary interest in them because it would be a
demonstration of actual bias.

Yet, judges, or state employed judicial hearing officers, in the domestic
relations courts, sit on these cases every day. This has created a tyranny
by having the state criminalize a civil matter. As stated in the article, it
says that the district attorneys are getting into the act in prosecuting
people for child support arrearages.

Again, this is a blatant due process and equal protection violation. When
were the payor parents told, at the inception of the child support matter,
that the matter would be converted from a civil case into a criminal case?
When were they read their Miranda rights, such as right to remain silent
about their financial situation, or given their right to trial by jury or
right to appointed, competent effective counsel to defend them properly.

As can be seen by this lack of substantive due process, the entire child
support enforcement mechanism is a fraud and a scam that smacks of
racketeering. If any debt collection agency did this for any other debt,
they be facing massive fines and criminal charges. They would be put out of
business immediately.

New York State claims it is going after so-called "deadbeats" by
criminalizing child support delinquencies and jailing those with large
arrearages. Sounds good. However, if one were to investigate the situation
they would find that most of the state's largest delinquent child support
obligors are unemployed, underemployed, undereducated, disabled, minorities,
or deceased. That's right-deceased! The state needs to keep those numbers on
its books in order to maximize the federal funding it receives.

According to a 7-year longitudinal academic study done by Arizona State
University that became the book, "Divorced Dads-Shattering the Myths", it
was uncovered that less than 5% of all delinquent child support payors are
true "deadbeats"-those with the expensive sports cars and trophy wives half
their age. So, where is the child support "deadbeat" hysteria? There is
none. It is being contrived by the federal and state governments in order to
control families, steal children, and eliminate fathers from families so
that the state can become the "super-parent". It is another tyrannical
government program to extract money from taxpayers to support the
government's own largesse.

The state defrauds the taxpayers by claiming they are doing it "for the
children". The government never does something for its citizens without a
quid pro quo. In the U.S. Supreme Court case DeShaney v. Winnebago County
Board of Social Services, the high Court ruled that the state owes no duty
to protect its citizens. So, the question begs: "Why is the state
discriminating against one-half of the population to enforce child support?"
It is obvious. It is not about the children or getting people off of
welfare. It is about how much money the states can rake in so they can
appropriate more money from the feds to balance their own budgets.

Federal child support enforcement laws were designed solely for TANF
(Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) and for welfare families. It was
never designed for the "never-welfared" middle class. However, child support
bureaucrats and other hangers-on testified before Congress that they needed
to bring the middle-class into the fray in order to receive maximum benefits
from the federal government in order to bolster state budgets.
Interestingly, not one child support payor, or any advocacy group for child
support payors was allowed to testify before Congress and the New York State
legislature (or for any other state for that matter) in devising child
support enforcement legislation. Again, we see a pattern of racketeering
conspiracy and government tyranny at the expense of innocent taxpayers.

There is a large hue and cry across the country to curtail divorces because
it threatens the very fabric of our society. The reason is because one
parent is allowed to divorce the other without any grounds. One parent can
divorce and abuse the legal system to win the divorce, all of the money and
assets of the marriage, and win custody of the children (with all the
attendant financial benefits that come with this). It's all because of child
support. Child support enforcement has created the "divorce state". Not only
does child support increase the amount of divorces because of the financial
windfall to the custody-winning parent, it threatens society. Child support
enforcement laws are in reality a threat to national security.

The time has come for lawmakers to take a second look at the draconian child
support enforcement laws in this country because these laws are not
constitutional. Child support enforcement laws are a threat to national
security. To stop this threat, lawmakers either need to eliminate or
seriously curtail child support enforcement against innocent taxpayers, or
they must tax child support the way alimony is taxed. This would immediately
slow down divorces in this country. This is because the custodial parent,
(in over 80% of all cases it is the mother-further gender discrimination
against males), would think twice about divorcing on grounds that their
marriage is not satisfactory, before having to pay the additional large
income tax burden.

Bruce Eden is the director of DADS (Dads Against Discrimination),
New Jersey and New York chapters,
Fathers Rights Association of New Jersey,
PO Box 4075, Wayne, NJ 07474
(973) 616-9558.
[email protected]

Even a whole village can't replace dad, children need both parents.


The exact same thing happened in Russia, and it was exactly because of their child support program.  

Canada and the US model their systems after Russia.


The Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement Report for FY 2005

Table  3

Total Collections for the year      $23,005,880,131

A very large exchange of non taxable wealth.


Quote from: "kjm"
Total Collections for the year      $23,005,880,131

That's about the entire gross domestic product of Sri Lanka or Lithuania, earned by men and transferred to the control of women.

Add in alimony per year ($7 billion: Seven billion dollars per year), dates and vacations, property settlements in divorces, extra taxes that men pay vis-a-vis extra money received by women from the government, in addition to informal prostitution and several other facets of modern life, and you're almost starting to talk about real money. There's also obviously a huge inter-family transfer, particularly in cases where the woman doesn't work, but she is driving a Mercedes.

It always amazes me exactly how much is flowing from men to women when you take a careful look.


Quote from: "Galt"

It always amazes me exactly how much is flowing from men to women when you take a careful look.

Socialism is the Transfer of Wealth.  And those that enforce it are just there to skim off the top.

Go Up