Thursday, March 08, 2007

Ending Liberal Welfare Politics by Akindele Akinyemi




Before I begin this I must thank those who have been supportive of my efforts of helping build urban regional networks through family values and educational choice. While others are wasting time calling me uncle tom, ignorant or even a sellout we are still moving ahead of schedule. Some say when am I going to start building networks here in Detroit. The answer to this is never.


















The reason? Detroit is far too liberal on their thinking to even consider building an URBAN regional network with others. It would be a total waste of time trying to build something this delicate. This is why I am urging conservatives to MOVE OUT of Detroit so we can build a greater urban regional network. For all of you liberals stuck on race we are not afraid of "de White Man." Now, smaller communities like Inkster, River Rouge and Ecorse we can build a network on conservative principles out there. While these type of communities may have the same problems like Detroit I strongly feel that we can find, raise, train and motivate individuals who will be eligible to run for office and bring a sense of family values to the community.








Speaking of family values we cannot begin to support candidates or community activists who continue to give out Sambo Awards like those uneducated fools at Call Em Out. Now is the time to build on urban conservative communities by focusing on both the educational and faith based community. Any church that is not following traditional values in this day and age in our community should not be included in the transformation process because they are utilizing their pulpit for Democratic profit.










A more serious concern that we must address is the serious concern for African Americans in our community. Blacks have suffered from statist demagoguery and machiavellian chicanery more than any over demographic. But the collective total of citizens suffering from plantation politics is certainly a silent majority. Senior citizens who depend on Medicare and Social Security or whose family bonds were destroyed long ago by laws and policies are in bondage too. Indeed, anyone whose lives are controlled by Social Security Welfare statutes under TitlesIV A, B, D & E are in de facto and de jure slavery.












In order for us to build these types of networks the educational process must happen first before any physical movement. This is what I have been doing with this blog for the past 2 years. Educating you on what is right. Regardless of how I may talk or sound it has always been an educational process.












Today, there is an overwhelming need in our state for an education campaign on the value of fathers and mothers equally in the lives of their children. Soon, there will be a bill being introduced by lawmakers on Shared Parenting legislation. This is legislation that would require a presumption of substantial equal parenting, in most instances, for unwed and divorced parents, unless there is clear and convincing evidence of unfitness. A similar bill was introduced in 2005 as HB 5267 by Former State Rep. Leslie Mortimer.












Guess who is against this bill? State Representative Brenda Clack (a Democrat who is the head of the Michigan Legislative Black Caucus) from Flint? If anyone who should be supporting this measure is Rep. Clack. After all how many families (especially in District 34 - her district) are intact in Flint? I know first hand that her district looks like a third world country and the Black women who I know and interviewed have repeatedly told me that it is virtually impossible to find a good Black man. Furthermore, this WHOLE Black Caucus should not only be supporting any bill that is geared towards family building BUT leading the way on this since we are impacted the most. ANY African American legislator should be supporting any and ALL measures to bring families together since two-parent homes in the African American community are non-existent without government interference.










Again, this is where Urban Conservatives should draw the line with legislators that look like us. Just because they are Black does not mean we give them a free pass because they are the minority in Lansing. It is OUR God given responsibility to support healthy, Christian relationships in our homes and communities. Any silence on this issue is failure on our parts. Yes, that includes those Black Republicans who are sitting on their asses and waiting for the next election to breeze through. There is much work to be done in urban communities across Michigan.








Darrick-Scott Farnsworth of A Child's Right skillfully explains the following:








There also have been studies done on the impact of divorce and the bias within our society. Children are taught that their mother is more important then their father through school curriculum content, entertainment themes and news media slanted presentations. The news shows present stories on the importance of mother’s work outside of a traditional job without trying to remove any of the gender bias in the story by letting the viewers know about the work that father’s typically do outside of the work place and the importance of the work that father’s do to support the household and our society. Many children’s books that have a parent in them have the mother but not the father or show fathers as foolish and incompetent. At school fathers have to push the system to include them when it comes to news, information and events and are told since they are not the custodial parent they can not make decisions for their child. The feminist would have you think that fathers are not biased against when it comes to the court system but the facts do not show this to be true. Lawyers often tell fathers that they well not get equal custody and that they should not push for it because it could upset the pro-woman judges and make the divorce process harder.






I wanted to go back and discuss what is Title IV-D. I thank Michael Ross of the Family Rights Coalition for bring me to the light on this issue as well as Minister Ronald Smith of the Children Needs Both Parents Coalition (who is part of the One Network in Grand Rapids).






According to Phyllis Schlafly:






Title IV-D Welfare - “The federal incentives drive the system. The more divorces, and the higher the child-support guidelines are set and enforced (no matter how unreasonable), the more money the state bureaucracy collects from the feds. Follow the money. The less time that non-custodial parents (usually fathers) are permitted to be with their children, the more child support they must pay into the state fund, and the higher the federal bonus to the states for collecting the money. "







Michigan has the largest number of families in Title IV-D per capita in the nation exceeding California by over 2 to 1.







Michigan also has the largest ratio of Title IV-D cases per minor child in the nation. Surpassing California by 236 percent: 41.52% vs. 17.63%








The purpose and intent of the IV-D is this. It was designed to be a welfare off-set program. The IV-D program was set up as a collection agency for the purpose of cost recovery or cost avoidance to lower cost to the taxpayer and reduce the financial burden on the government for those mothers and children who were dependent on the government for their basic needs. The U.S. House Ways and Means Committee Green Book, 2000, clearly indicates the IV-D program was meant for two classes of single parent families: 1) those on welfare, and 2) those formerly on welfare and at risk of being back on welfare if they don’t receive their child support payment.










The purpose and intent of the program was to prevent women and children from falling into poverty when they were abandoned by the chief or sole wager earner, (assumed to be the dad), resulting in their dependence on the government. And who is funding this program? The taxpayer. This program was based on the belief that men were the sole financial providers and women were incapable of taking care of themselves financially. The IV-D program was designed to protect those roles.



The intended beneficiaries of this program never included wealthy, affluent, or those who could self-sustain without government intervention. There is no evidence to support a federal mandate to the states to provide services to the “rich.”




This altered thinking can distort public policy, resulting in usurpation of congressional intent. The IV-D system has instead become a paradise of position power for all man-haters and money grubbing bureaucrats hungry for control.




The reason intentional overreach of authority by the IV-D agency is apparent. The state and county IV-D agencies recognize that by giving these services to NON-NEEDY cases, they increase their caseload, thereby increasing the amount of support payments funneled through the county; thereby increasing the amount of federal dollars flowing back to the states; thereby ensuring job security. The higher the child support payment, the higher the federal funding, because the federal funding is a total percent of the total support payments funneled through the state system. The motive is money. NOT money for the children – that is a marketing ploy – it’s money for the state program. If it was really the “best interest of the children” that they were concerned about, there would be an abundance of state program to promote fatherhood and courts would routinely enforce visitation orders and give dads joint physical custody when a fit father wants to be involved in the lives of his children.






The states have over extended the congressional intent of the IV-D law and have disregarded eligibility standards for IV-D welfare services in order to maximize the federal dollars to the state, by subsequently allowing everyone into the welfare program – whether they need it or not.





For example, the federal funding is what motivates the Minnesota DHS to declare their main purpose of child support guideline reform is to increase child support, because that produces more money for the department. Most enlightened parents know, “more money” is not what children need most. The entrenched bureaucrats want more money to build their fiefdoms at the expense of children, families, and taxpayers. The DHS is “pimping” children to get more money for themselves. When you ask children if they want more time with their parents or more “things,” they will always choose more time with their parents. The IV-D program is set up to systematically replace the dad with things. Its about greed for the government agency over need for the children.




As more parents received higher orders to pay through the system year after year, OCSE reported increases in "collections" (which were mostly non-problematic non-welfare related payments that would have been paid anyway). States (the CSE program) received more federal funding as a result of reporting higher "collections."



Federal funding is provided at a rate of 66% - or up to 76% with incentives. However, this DOES NOT cover all the costs, and with known and hidden costs, this program is COSTING Minnesota taxpayers at least $139 million a year. Even if the federal taxpayers (same people who pay state and county taxes) are providing a 76% reimbursement, it is still, minimally, an additional $30 million in state and county taxpayer money that’s required.




The remaining portion unfunded by federal reimbursements is split equally between state and county taxpayers. Property taxes pay for the program. In Hennepin County, Minnesota, a $6 million tax levy in 2002 was required JUST TO PAY FOR THIS ONE LINE ITEM: IV-D child support and related services!



You see why Dick DeVos said a 4-year cut off limit on Welfare when he was running for Governor? Black folks fell asleep behind the wheel and GAVE not only Gov. Granholm the keys back to the Governor's seat but also gave the State House to the Democrats. We have to RESEARCH our information. Even if someone must read it to you OPEN YOUR MIND.




This is all systematically designed to keep us on the plantation with liberals who continue to force government down our throats. For any Black legislator to be against two-parent homes in our community should not be re-elected. This is serious and One Network is working with the Family Rights Coalition, Children Need Both Parents, Dads of Michigan PAC, A Child's Right, and others who have joined in as we continue to push forward in pushing state government out of our homes and building strong family structures to generate educational and economic wealth in our communities.



We are building a movement right now through regional networking. Join in or get out of the way.

No comments: