Let's Get Honest! Blog: Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?…' (posted 3/23 & 3/5/2014). Over 680 posts, Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Vital Info: “Sticky” Posts Now Listed Here [2/8/2017, rev. 5/26 and, again 6/19/2017]

with one comment

Adjusted Title of this post:  Vital Info: “Sticky” Posts (Now Listed Here)   [2/8/2017, rev. 5/26/2017]

With its WordPress-generated, case-sensitive short-link ending “-5MQ” that would be: Vital Info: “Sticky” Posts (Now Listed Here)   [2/8/2017, adjusted 5/26/2017] {{INCLUDING THAT SHORT-LINK HELPS ME, THE BLOG ADMINISTRATOR (AND THE ONLY ONE POSTING HERE) KEEP LINKS ACCURATE AS I AM WRITING POSTS CLOSELY RELATED IN  SUBJECT MATTER SERIES, WHEN POSTS ARE REFERENCED, SPLIT, OR EXPANDED}}


The post’s former motto, displayed in top-right corner, has been obscured by the title once I upgraded the blog. I moved the former motto into the title (Site Identity) area, and changed the motto. It’s still not fully visible, so, for the record, here it is as of “Q1” 2017:

‘A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment’ | ‘Suppose I’m Right Here?…’ (posted 3/23 & 3/5/2014).

Over 680 posts, Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

 So, the blog motto clearly references two posts (no longer “sticky”) which demonstrate my practices (“A Different Kind of Attention“) and my basic question, based on those practices over now many years, “Suppose I’m Right Here?  What Would You Do When the Lights Go On?”  (Would it change your personal cause-focused social media behavior or “leisure time”?) If I’m right (and I typically link to supporting evidence and coherent connections between the various parts of it; if there is missing evidence or improper connections/assumptions others can see) what logical (even if seemingly impossible at first) changes should be made to major systems, infrastructures, and practices involving “business as usual” in the public sphere– which is in effect now a “public/private partnership” sphere?

If you (personally) are just not willing or able to make any significant changes to what you repeat, parrot, re-blog or even what you look into regularly, to better understand public/private financing, government statements, federal grants as distributed, the grantees, or the multitude of professional associations developed around basic governmental positions (National Governors Association, and MANY others others), then on what basis are you complaining about government practices?  These practices occur in the context of networks of nonprofit organizations which conference with each other and with membership, often out of sight or out of mind of the average citizen. ****

**** I keep encountering more of this type of nonprofit association, some which have existed for decades, others (such as the National Council on School Facilities) are recent creations. This post will explain, and list more:

Published without tags, about 13,500 words (including captions to its many images), Friday, June 16, 2017.

By the time you read this, if you’re still in denial about the extensive networks of private associations involving government officials on the board, or restricted to them as members (but — hey, let’s not reject some donations — not as sponsoring partners or “Associates”) and that while government at different levels continues to fund such entities, they aren’t exactly advertising the inter-relationships on gov’t websites, or the financials on the association websites — and that these associations operate in the private, nonprofit sector with intent to affect the government sector (at all levels) bypassing normal input from citizens — then please seek personal help.  Fast.  You’re cognitively disabled.

New professions and fields of practice (leading to the overuse of the word “practitioner”) are created through public institutions sometimes as an apparent consequence of these trade organizations.  When those in them and setting them up know more about the status of government entity financing than the citizens overall, where is the balance of power?  What is the purpose of institutions maintaining a semblance or sense of justice, fairness, and due process when surrounded by this entire situation attempting to regionalize, nationalize and internationalize the whole infrastructure — and backed by stockpiled wealth from corporations housed (often) in privately controlled empires or quasi-empires of foundations — with investments wherever they want those investments to be.  These then collectively talk about budget deficits, especially regarding pension contributions, for the public to justify (fill in the blank)______ while skilfully avoiding discussion of available assets, and the investment incomes and revenues they are already producing.  (The last sentence was a reference to the “CAFRs” which accounting basis is according to a board connected with the GFOA (Government Finance Officers of America.####  The rest of that paragraph, however, and the one before, refer to topics I’ve been on for several years now, but which are hard to see without opening a tax return (or lots of them) and, well, “A Different Kind of Attention.”).

#### I decided to look into this again, and stand correct about “Who’s on First” when it comes to calling the shots.  It’s not the GFOA (although they were named as going along with it), but the Financial Accounting Foundation (“FAF”) in Norwalk, Connecticut.  The FAF was established by the AICPA (I’ll let you look that up — it ends “CPA” which is a clue) ca. 1971, and starting with the FASB for the private sector, and then the GASB for government, gradually standards were set.  A careful reading of the timeline and of the documents avialable, shows that both the FASB and GASB are still under the ultimate control of the FAF, although powers have been delegated to each of them.


The CAFRs (Collectively) ARE “The Whole Nine Yards,” But Who Sets the Rules that Those Govt Entities Producing the CAFRs Must Obey? (Basic History of the FAF, GASB, FASB, that even those referencing one of the above still typically ignore) [Started June 7, 2017] (shortlink ends “-6Z9”)

I’ll finish this after publishing the post it came from (Yet Another “Recent Research Suggests” link (2015 quoting pre-2010 source) unearths Yet Another Chameleon Corp. and Its Also Recently Re-branded Partner, ALL Targeting the $20 Billion School Supplies, Facilities, Technology and “Learning Environments” Marketplace. Internationally, of Course. (shortlink ends “-6Wy”), as an illustration.

[“Yet Another ‘Recent Research Suggests’ ” has been published since. See right sidebar.  “The CAFRS (Collectively) ARE The Whole Nine Yards” has not.  I have observations on the latter which won’t show up on the FAF website, but if you don’t feel like waiting, here’s a “40 years of FASB” and “30 Years of GASB” links from the FAF website, called “Accountingfoundation.org“.  And two annotated images:

FAF home page annotated (click to enlarge as needed).

FAF “Financial” page offers audited financial statements and annual reports — but not IRS returns (Forms 990). Good enough reason to go get them!


[Some paragraphs removed to shorten the top (highest positioning) post on this blog, 5/26/2017. Access it on its own page easily HERE (PAGE title, with its case-sensitive shortlink ending “-6TM”): About My Blog Motto (formerly on Vital Info/Sticky Links post, moved here  May 26, 2017).  Some overlap with this post. Updated material, important concepts.]


(FILE THE FINE-PRINT SECTION HERE under “EXHORTATION / OBSERVATION”):

It seems to be human nature to construct narratives of reality, especially about things one has some experience with and wishes to bond with shared experiences by others on. However this need for simplified bonding phrases can also ensnare individuals in self-defeating suppositions.

I have little respect for professionals, trained in mediating and facilitating groups who as professionals hold conflicts-of-interest professional affiliations but do not disclose these to the people they are “helping.”

In the fields of domestic violence, fathers’ rights (“responsible fatherhood”), “child maltreatment” / child abuse, divorce, custody and child support, all those fields are crowded with conflicts of interests. The ENTIRE family court apparatus itself represents exactly this kind of conflict of interest in its administration, its goals, and its operations — something which can be at least pursued and tracked historically through tracking the behavior of primary nonprofits (plural!) involved.  Meanwhile, irrational speculation and ongoing suggestions that one can professionally clean up specific practices within single fields involving the family courts continues.  In the context, (and in my opinion) this is ridiculous and at times also showing conflicts of interest within the groups propounding it.  FIRST, handle the conflicts of interest — financial, and close the doors to any money-laundering, and payment of bribes.

It shouldn’t take too long to figure out that this essentially means, closing the doors to court-connected corporations themselves, while welfare law (1996) and other acts of Congress before them (such as the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act, “FVPSA,” I came to learn over time) specifically allocate funding for control of the field — coming through HHS.  Meanwhile, “HMRF” funding also comes through HHS, and separately since 1994, first passage of the “Violence Against Women Act (“VAWA”), funding through the corresponding Office (OVW) created to implement it, continues as though the previous grants didn’t even exist.

With so much  money swirling around to fund conflicting sides of the “rights” run through federal agency grants (not to mention private, too), it’s only logical that less than ethical collaborations will develop to commandeer these funds, and dominate the field.

In fact, in late 1999 and right after, an example of this would be the Greenbook Initiative, follow up to a publication by (Edelson/Schechter) the National Council of Family and Juvenile Court Judges.  The Greenbook Initiative (2000ff) involved both USDOJ and USDHHS and several large tax-exempt foundations I ended up studying in part because of their involvement in the same.  IF NO ONE in the “protective parents” advocacy groups (tag-teaming with the already centralized domestic violence agencies) is willing to take on “the big guys” in these matters, they will end up as they have been — recirculating the same factoids, poster child cases, and slightly altered basic reasoning the started with years ago, continuing to ignore or even assess the size of “The elephant in the room.”

I got REAL tired of this and a lot more valuable understanding, insight, starting with more information, writing this blog, and reducing my involvement in crazy on-line conversations (and marches, rallies conferences, too). Most of this blog results from having come to my senses many years ago on that matter, and it continues to be fun (though a lot of work) in some senses to write. 

It will also be some work to read, but I believe worthwhile, and that once you “get the hang of” the importance of doing those lookups, and expose YOUR eyes, ears, and attention to the evidence I’m posting, you will find its contents valuable.

ALSO, I still believe that individually (and not always organized under a banner, a group name, a nonprofit, or a “movement”) both women and men can make a significant difference by demanding honesty in personal associations (including on-line), and taking enough solitary time to do some basic, (BASIC basic) drill-downs (actually, “look-ups” might be a better word…) on their favorite philanthropies or nonprofits (pick one — it almost doesn’t matter), then look at some more.
Read the rest of this entry »

2017 Table of Contents Continues Themes From 2016.

with one comment

Rev. 1/12/2017

For 2017 Link to this post for this year2017 Table of Contents Continues Themes from 2016   I am writing mid-January, 2017, so all posts still display (for now) on “Most Recent Posts” on the sidebar.  The (short, so far) Table for 2017 however, is at the bottom of this page. It will at any point in time be only as updated as I have taken time to make it.  Meanwhile, the “8 most recent posts” is the best indicator of how current this table is.

  • Valuable material in addition to the actual list (table) of posts remains on the 2016 post, but I included below on this post some images of the actual TOC 2016 (minus the extra narratives), which copied into a word-processing document, formatted, then “printed to pdf.” Printing to pdf and loading that pdf onto the blog (accessible by a single click on the link I provide) produces a document in which every post in that table can be accessed by clicking on its name.  On every row, the post’s underlined title is an active link to the post, whether viewed here, or viewed on the uploaded pdf (8.5X11) format
    • This sounds more complex than it is.  Anyhow, after those images and the “access” link comes the Table for 2017, which I will add to as I publish each post. In fact it’s towards the end of this (so far, short) post.
  • As before, the right sidebar will display titles and links to only the last few posts.  I have it set to only eight.  The blog as a whole contains about 670 posts.

Here’s a link to the one-page pdf of TOC 2017 in 8.5X11 pdf form.  It includes the last three posts from 2016 too, and an two images (one for each page) of what it will look like:

Click for the 2017 TOC + last 3 of 2016 (with active links). It's just 1 page.

Click for the 2017 TOC + last 3 of 2016 (post titles = active, links). It’s just 1 page and current through Feb. 6 only. UPDATED: TOC through March 21, adds p.2, here. Or see partial table (updated) right on the post, right below here for Posts Feb 9- March 21, 2017)…(After adding new posts to tables on this blog post, I updated, and printed to pdf, added an image for “Page 2” here as you can see, in 8X11.5 format)

<==toc-2017-@ feb-8-2017

<==TOC 2017 @ through March 21, 2017

Posts 6-15; (Image of second page added 3/22/2017). Post titles are active links (clickable) through the TOC 2017 pdf link above image, not on the image itself. The link in this caption is just in case someone wishes to view it better.



 6  Vital Info: Formerly “Sticky” Posts (pared down from 15)       [2/8/2017] Feb. 9, 2017
7 Progressive Language Creep Section from 2012 “Reconceptualize This” post (reviewed and reformatted 2017) Feb. 19, 2017
8 Retrospective @ 1/2017:  Beginning-of-Year Posts (“As I’ve Been Saying, Since 2009”) and an Update or Two  Feb. 21, 2017
9 OHIO.  My Oh My…  501©3, EIN#34-1376870, ACTION Ohio Coalition for Battered Women, a 1970s, deficit-ridden holdout, Still testifying – NOT, of course, about OHIO.Fatherhood.Gov (1999ff), though… Feb. 28, 2017
10 Understand Statewide “CADV” Funding (CFDAs 93591, 93592, 93671, and 93136 grants to Statewide Orgs) But Also Check Out “Family and Community Violence Prevention” (93910) in all its Male/Minority-focused Wealth — Over $99M to One Recipient under ONE Principal Investigator, Spanning 10 years — and Glory. Mar 6, 2017
11  Don’t know Who or What ~QIC-NRF ~ is?  Looks like neither do the AHA, the NFI, the ABA Center on Children and the Law, and HHS/Children’s Bureau (at least as uploaded at UCBerkeley’s School of Social Welfare CalSWEC) who collaborated on IT, then reported IT as a WHO (2010).  File under Fatherhood Engagement Absurdities — or at least, lots of anomalies —  2010 Mar. 7, 2017
12  Should the USA join the Commonwealth of Nations?  And if Not, Why Should We Allow our Elected Federal and State Officials to sponsor Coordination of Child Welfare, Domestic Violence, and Family Court|Custody Practices, as Ordered (Ordained?) by Appointed (not elected) Experts To Promote Their Personal Beliefs, Practices, and Profits? (A Few Reminders of Who’s Who) Mar. 12, 2017
13 Explaining my Inspirat’n for asking, on March 8, Internat’l Women’s Day, Should the USA Join the Commonwealth of Nations?… Mar. 17, 2017
14  Who is Foundation Press? (Started 1/22/2017, published 3/20/2017) Mar. 20, 2017
15 Dear Readers (2017 Themes and Ongoing Concerns) [started 1/19, published in part 2/19, and the whole enchilada 3/21/17] Mar. 21, 2017

For 2016 ONLY with valuable material before/after:

It (also) is now accessible in two formats — on-line, or a printed pdf (paginated to fit 8.5X11 format), as explained below (pdf completed added post-publication here).

I closed out 2016 with an average of one post a week (52 posts total). 

Link to TOC 2016 & that post’s revised title:  {1}Table of Contents 2016 (52 posts Jan. 23 – Dec. 13, 2016) with {2} Intro on First 5 Years Fund(ing), incl. but not limited to Tobacco Lawsuit Settlement Payouts + Warren Buffett’s “Ounce of Prevention Fund”(IL) and {3} Appendix of Tags from some Critical-to-Understand Posts
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

January 9, 2017 at 8:09 pm

Do You Know Your EDC (EIN#04-2241718 in Massachusetts)? Or Why It Became a Greenbook Initiative ~Evaluation Partner~ Alongside ICF International and the NCSC? If Not, Pls. Look Now! [Orig. 11/15/2016, Rev. & made “Sticky” 6/24/2017]

with one comment

Post title: Do You Know Your EDC (EIN#04-2241718 in Massachusetts)? Or Why It Became a Greenbook Initiative ~Evaluation Partner~ Alongside ICF International and the NCSC? If Not, Pls. Look Now!*

*(with case-sensitive shortlink ending “-4TG”).  Published 11/15/2016, made sticky (and some images added near top, and missing ones replaced in middle) 6/25/2017 for its place in other topics I’m currently featuring.

Massachusetts Corporation/Business Entity Search (although EDC is a Delaware legal domicile entity with a MA address).  What’s a bit odd about the master page is that EDC is NOT labeled “nonprofit” although it seems to be one:

edcein042241718-43-foundry-ave-waltham-ma-annotated-ext-master-page-topscrshot-2016-12-14 <==Click to read image to left: edcein042241718-43-foundry-ave-waltham-ma-annotated-ext-master-page-topscrshot-2016-12-14-png

edcein042241718-ext-master-pg-officerdirector-listscrshot-2016-12-14

if needed, click here to read officer list full-sized.

Click on “All Filings” on the “master page” which comes up (after click on organization name) to view some older listings of officers showing their affiliations.

[See next fine-print, light-blue “lost the reference” paragraph.  I found it again, reprinted, annotated here.

Gail T.P. Wickes @EDC (since 1973) made some serious rippled as Gail Thain Parker, 1st woman President of Bennington College, VT. Part of issue behind her resignation dealt with her “futures” plan to rescue it financially; she said, too many tenured professors. I can see why, if there is a connection, Ted Sizer at CES and/or Brown U. might want her. See published books.

Click image to enlarge annotated image; but click HERE for the associated EDC registration in MA (1970s) listing first officers and Board as shown above.

I looked up  the almost NO women on the board (@1972) and put some urls on the image.  Gail Thain Parker (now “Gail T.P. Wickes” as Harvard BA & PhD but was -briefly – the youngest women college president in the US, and first one of Bennington College, VT, with her (then-husband).  It didn’t go well.  She was only 29!  EDC still lists her, says, on its board since 1973 (before her time at Bennington), and now is a stockbroker].

For example, here’s for year 2010:[June2017 Update note: that link is a generic, not a saved search, and no longer valid. Despite looking again through some of the key personnel (other MA corporations they ran) and earlier (and revealing) EDC returns, I DNR what I was looking at, this time.  I did see William DeJong listed as just 1 of 5 contractors (paid bout $59,000) in FY2001 or 2002; I’ve blogged DeJong’s since on FamilyCourtMatters). I would like to know what the reference was, but for now, do not. Tax Years Fiscal Years 2002 + 2001 from 990Finder (FoundationCenter) have financial statements attached; 2001 has a schedule of contracts and pass-through federal agencies.  Neither particularly explains what they do on the Form 990 “Program Service Accomplishments” page in those years, and Highest Paid Subcontractors” omit contact addresses, or even state/country info). EDC’s Gov’t grants (see Scheds A) escalated by millions, yearly 1998-2003 at least. I AM ADDING 5 IMAGES from EARLIER EDC IRS RETURNS, 2 show its highest paid contractor, all show avoidance tactics (disrespectful to the public) in filling out Forms 990. The first image is as wide as the post, others are smaller. (But FS were attached, also) //LGH]

#1 of 5 Images, EDC (EIN#042240218) FY2002 Shows ca. ¾ of funding is govt grants)(Image added post-publicatn 6/2017)

Image #2 of 6, EDC (EIN#042240218) FY2002 Shows Despite $67M Program ($84M Total) Expenses, EDC doesn’t feel obligated to fill out “Program Service Accomplishments” page (and got the FY wrong on its boilerplate excuse for better PSA breakdown)(Image added post-publicatn 6/2017)

Image #3 of 6, EDC (EIN#042240218) FY2002 Subcontractors, no state or even country info provided. See next images for highest subcontractor (SLK) shown…

Image #4 of 6, EDC (EIN#042240218) FY2001<== (Wm. DeJong shown) Subcontractors, no state or even country info provided even when subcontractor’s name is a person. See next images for highest subcontractor (SLK) shown…[Same Form990 part as Image#3, diff’t year)

Image #6 of 6, RE: EDC (EIN#042240218) FY2001 + 2002 highest paid subcontractors, no state or even country info provided. SLK Leadership (most, but it’s all men)shown…SLK is named after first Indian to graduate from MIT (in 1926) see website for more info.

Image #5 of 6, RE: EDC (EIN#042240218) FY2001 & 2002 Subcontractor, no state or even country info provided, BLOOMBERG.com shows SLK Software Svces Pvt. Ltd. only formed in 2000(!), based in India Click to read its target clientele, and that it’s subsidiary of SLK Group


(continuing the original narrative from this post)
I see listings from Brown (in Rhode Island, “Coalition of Essential Schools”), Columbia U. School of International and Public Affairs, Harvard JFK School of Government, Watertown (Mass).Public Schools, a person from Texas House of Representatives, Dept of Health (Boston), someone from PaineWebber (NJ), from NYNEX Corp in White Plains, NY, others without listed affiliations (incl. from Bethesda, MD) and in the only non-east-Coast director, Dean T. Jamison from UCLA.


Curious about that Brown University “Coalition of Essential Schools,” connection of an EDC board member,  I simply looked it up and immediately seea repeating pattern among progressive (specifically) school reform advocates preaching democracy, egality, etc.  – and how this translates into how, and from where (Harvard, Yale, Brown for starters in this case) they like to do business.  The website is ‘EssentialSchools.org” and there is a Wiki.


I removed these about 4,000 words (before any expansion) from the “Who Produced the Greenbook Initiative” post which itself started as front matter from my original (2014-backwards) Table of Contents Post. [Full Title:  Who Produced The Greenbook Initiative? And, About NGA, NCJFCJ, AFCC, Council on State Govts (Trade Associations You Should Know).  (Moved from “My Posts-Just the List” on 10-5-2016, Expanded by 2/3rds and Posted 11/8/2016) ]


As I am not doing the conference circuit, cannot do this AND Facebook, Twitter, seek on-line MSM journalist spots, my main vehicle for communicating these understandings, unless you happen to encounter me in a public place and get to talking, is really this blog. When not doing this blog, these days, I am considering how to deal with the current life situations which have a number of pending litigation situations, or one that ought to become litigation, the purpose this time to alleviate my current situation of being extorted, long-term, with housing at risk.


You’d be surprised how little it can take to wreck others’ lives once children are taken hostage, and when the only venue to correct this is the current family court system as pumped up on marriage and fatherhood promotions and untraceable funding flowing through the system AND the administrative bureaucracy backing up its practices, like some athletes have been found to be on steroids.


I am writing this just days before a US Presidential election in which charges about the Clinton Foundation or the Trump Foundations come up occasionally, while almost no one is talking about the significance of the tax-exempt foundation as a sector influencing just how “great” America is, or is not, presently.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

November 15, 2016 at 8:07 pm

Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011)

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

About the Language and Length (Notes on Writing Style from TOC 2014 post) with Work Sample: The Calif Endowment (Publ. 10-13-2016, “Sticky”)

with one comment

Some Notes on Length and Writing Style,

and Work Sample (Preview/Postlude)

(Exploring one nonprofit & one of its backing foundations  with financial and filing details sheds light on the organizations’ mutual and relative sizes, revenue sources, and overall purposes, as a counterpoint and “backdrop” to organization’s public-profiles, i.e., their websites)  

Full Post Title & ShortLink:  About the Language and Length (Notes on Writing Style from TOC 2014 post) with Work Sample: The Calif Endowment (Publ. 10-13-2016, “Sticky”)

Including evidence from “The California Endowment” (“TCE”)’s Fiscal year 2004 Form 990PF return; it shows supplemental Statements detailing Direct Charitable Activities (expenses $16M),  and afterwards, showing dollar amounts in expenses, investments, liabilities, etc. as shown on the main IRS form.

The “charitable activities” performed that year were in part in conjunction with The California Healthcare Foundation to develop an Internet “app” to streamline people’s applications for as many social services and healthcare (welfare-type, public-funded) services as possible:

In conjunction with third-party vendor, The California Endowment supervised the development and implementation of the One-e-App technology solution. One-e-App is a Web-based system that is designed to screen and enroll all eligible individuals in California in multiple publicly funded health and social service programs, such as Medi- Cal and Healthy Families…

While paying that same year $11M in investment managers’ fees and holding a variety of investments as the “evidence” link above shows.  Here’s TCE more recently and right underneath it, “The California Healthcare Foundation (also more recent return):

ORGANIZATION NAME ST YR FORM PP TOTAL ASSETS EIN
California Endowment CA 2015 990PF 188 $3,768,442,347.00 95-4523232

Check out the close similarity in EIN#s — interesting, huh? 954523232 and 945423231

We are looking at $3.7 billion assets vs. $0.78 billion (or $780M) in total gross assets…

ORGANIZATION NAME ST YR FORM PP TOTAL ASSETS EIN
California HealthCare Foundation CA 2015 990O 237 $780,974,997.00 95-4523231

The California Healthcare Foundation (assets a mere “pipsqueak” by TCE standards) with its (2015) $781M of assets, spent also a lot on its 7 independent contractors, i.e., investment managers, including over $2.6M on “Makena Capital Management, LLC.”…
Read the rest of this entry »

Get Real(itybloger)! — Call In, Read the Links on CAFRs, Review Regularly. (First posted Jan. 24, 2014)

with 3 comments

The “CAFR” topic is a governmental accounting and reporting practice which affects all people (and particularly in this situation, all US Citizens) because of its impact on the economy and our understanding of the size and scope of government operations. It is an over-arching and underlying issue, but it has been a hidden issue.

For example, as Carl Herman (Harvard Economics grad) put this in 2012, a very good question in my opinion.  Once certain evidence IS posted, it requires an review of reasoning built on “the big picture” (not including that evidence), and that “big picture” includes the hot topic of “DEFICIT.”

This is a “README” article! // Let’s Get Honest

CAFR summary: if $600B ‘fund’ can’t fund $27B pension, $16B budget deficit, why have it?(Posted on June 18, 2012 by Carl Herman in ‘Washington’s Blog”),

. . . Governor Brown is silent about the $600 billion in surplus cash and investments, claiming the $16 billion budget deficit can only be addressed by austerity – massive funding cuts to our essential infrastructure. A 2.8% divestment of the fund would cover the $16 billion deficit.
Read the rest of this entry »

ORPHANS: Where The Great Commission meets the Military-Industrial Complex [First Published May 18, 2013]

with one comment

NOTE: Intro. section in this background color added [free of charge] Jan. 2016, some years after original publication May 2013. “Nightlight Christian Adoptions” was mentioned in the original post, I’ve just been looking more closely at tax return contents, in the interim. The original post may have been more “inspired,” however…. //LGH….It deals with this topic:

NOTE: this 3,000 word (you’re welcome!) post is out of sequence — belongs back with the “On the Road to Emmaeus” and “”Christian Social Services: Replenishing the Ranks of the Faithful (Bethany Christian Services posts, ca. Eastertime, 2013.

  • 6723 Whittier, McLean, VA (Always Look Up Street Addresses!!!)**

…at one time or another these organizations (at a minimum) shared a street address:

  • SHAOHANNAH’S HOPE (later “SHOWHOPE”)
  • CONGRESSIONAL COALITION ON ADOPTION INSTITUTE (“CCAI”)
  • CHRISTIAN ALLIANCE FOR ORPHANS (“CAFO”)
  • ASSOCIATION OF FORMER INTELLIGENCE OFFICERS (“AFIO”)

File under, if you notice the details, What’s wrong with this picture?

Read the rest of this entry »

While We’re There — the Northern California Mediation Center . . . and ITS corporate records, history, people, etc. (publ. 9/22/2012)

with 4 comments

While We’re There — the Northern California Mediation Center . . . and ITS corporate records, history, people, etc. (publ. 9/22/2012) <==Full Post Title + shortlink.

[ca. 8,000 words.    Significant additions after publishing.NCMC   introduced as to corporate filings, some personnel. Post concludes  showing how “parental alienation” indoctrination happens,is self-perpetuating, and is hostile towards mothers, generally, and is definitely a marketable scheme [yes, scheme] as well. See “train-the-trainers” @ public cost mentality.In midstream, I’m taking (to another post) a basic explanation of what “Corporation” means, FYI]


We might as well talk about the Northern California Mediation Center alongside  The Judith Wallerstein Center for the Family in Transition, and right alongside respective corporate and nonprofit filings, fundings, tax returns affiliations and actions.{{The introduction is a little passionate, but it’s about a dozen paragraphs.  Scroll down if you want to skip them!  I added numbers to make it easier!}}
Read the rest of this entry »

Another POV on “The Center for the Family in Transition” (and its funders) (Publ. 9/22/2012)

with 3 comments

Another POV on “The Center for the Family in Transition” (and its funders) (Publ. 9/22/2012)
Excerpt pulled to top of post in 2016.  This sticky post (below which are more current ones) originally published 9/22/2012.  It should be put in bold print, large letters and stuck on a refrigerator IF one is stuck in divorce drama at this time, as a reminder of the resonance of the rooms it will be taking place in!

The phrase “Families in Transition” is jargon, and it is virtually trademarked for use in the courts.  The term comes from, it seems, ONE individual with key connections to psychoanalysis (Judith Wallerstein, who was married to Robert S. Wallerstein, also a devoted and highly placed psychoanalyst, at one time President of the International Psychoanalytic Association (“IPA”), essentially the inheritance of Sigmund Freud. 


This association, IPA, was formed shortly AFTER Sigmund Freud’s ex-communication (by colleagues) for ca. 1895 presenting “the Etiology of Hysteria” and saying it related to violent sexual and physical assaults on his patients by their caretakers (often fathers or uncles, etc.) from the early 1900s).   In the 1950s, “The Origins of Psychoanalysis” incl. editor Sigmund’s daughter Anna) apparently included censorship of how Freud viewed his own “about-face” after being cold-shouldered by his colleagues.  In the 1980s a man was given access to the Freud Archives and wrote about this, in the interest of speaking the truth, and was again could-shouldered, and taken off the archives also.


For more, see March 5, 2014 post “Suppose I’m Right Here ….What Would You Do When the Lights go on?” Seeing the Wallerstein-Wallerstein connection, and the consistent practice of re-framing reality (truths about person-to-person violence, including parent to child, man to woman, and vice versa), and the origins of the fields of psychoanalysis, psychiatry, psychology, get it? the “Psyche” field in general  having been introduced as the bedrock formula for the conception of “FAMILY” and the “FAMILY COURTS,” a logical deduction is that those courts are also essentially — not “tangentially” —  crooked.

So, how can that “crooked” be cleaned up?  Can it?  Does the propagation of truth versus the propagation of the coverup of the (often ugly) truth matter, or not?  If it does not matter, how can calling something “justice” be applied on top of that foundation?

Read the rest of this entry »

Cont’d from my Aug. 5 post…An Alternate Viewpt. on the Anti-Smoking Campaign and its Syndicated Backers …1998 Tobacco Litigation MSA followed by the 2007 (Opinion) USDOJ RICO [started 8/7, published 8/19/17 + updated since]

with one comment

Title, presently: Cont’d from my Aug. 5 post…An Alternate Viewpt. on the Anti-Smoking Campaign and its Syndicated Backers …1998 Tobacco Litigation MSA followed by the 2007 (Opinion) USDOJ RICO [started 8/7/2017] with case-sensitive short-link ending “-7pV”

At first the material was so vast, consequential, and filled with so many branches of related information, I simply called this one “Continued from the last post.” “Last” meaning “most recent,” of course.

Last post, title abbreviated: An Alternate Viewpoint on the Anti-Smoking / Smoking Causes Cancer! Campaign and its Syndicated Backers ….** and 1998 MSA Tobacco litigation. (shortlink ends “-7na”)


Mary Lasker with Albert D. Lasker. His third wife (her second husband; first had owned an art gallery, marriage didn’t last long). There appears to be something of an age difference… They married 1940; he retired (selling? Lord & Thomas) in 1942, which sale funded their foundation ($45M). L&T became Foote, Cone & Belding. By 1952 he was dead from cancer, which diagnosis (this article says) Mary kept from him…. (image of the Laskers from CBCRadio.com article, below).

After a week researching, compiling and writing the previous post, I gained a better understanding at least of the role of Mary Lasker (1900-1994), again, who, being Wife #3, outlived her wealthy husband Albert D. Lasker (1880-1952), owner of the dominating-the-field Lord & Thomas advertising agency in the early 1900s,** by some 42 years and who, with her powerful connections and relatives, made her will and influence known to a series of Presidents, Congresses, and NIH directors, as well as with some of them and/or other associates (people of influence in her social circle as a wealthy heiress of Mr. Lasker) running or re-directing a series of influential organizations central to public policy today, including at least a few associations mentioned as “Intervenors” in the USDOJ lawsuit against “big tobacco,” as shown here: [I re-post the same image and additional from the USDOJ Civil Actions lawsuit (Amended Opinion 2007)  listing the intervenor associations images much further below, with quote from its Introduction.  This gives an idea of the vast size of the proceedings. (My 12/16/2016 page has link to the entire opinion, and more)]

This image comes up again, further down in today’s (8/15/2017) post…USA Plaintiff, Tobacco-Free Kids, American~ Cancer,Heart,Lung, NonSmokersRights+NAATPN, *INTERVENORS* v. PhillipMorrisUSA et al CivilActn 99-2496(GK) [RICO] (Opin2007) (¼ images; cover page

Click to enlarge. Notice reference to “#BtheChange” and earlier comments from my Dec. 15, 2016 page, looking up the Intervenors.

naatpn-from-bhthechange-org-was-a-usdoj-tobacco-lawsuit-intervenor-but-looks-like-a-cdc-natl-netwk-partnerscreen-shot-2016dec30-8-17pm**

Notice “BHthechange” =/= “BtheChange.  The BH stands for “Behavioral Health.”

“BtheChange.org.UK” focuses on behavioral modification, peer mentoring for offenders.  The phrase seems over-used, but here’s the log.  This seems unrelated, I’m just referencing it because of the similar sound-bite:

(Logo from SaferStronger.com apparently uploaded July 2017? it seems to be an EU charity, (guess the UK hasn’t finished its BREXIT yet, the location seems to be in the UK). Also found at BtheChange.org.uk.


POST OVERVIEW: — I NOW HAVE A SEQUEL TO THIS POST READY TO GO; SOME OF ITS MATERIAL OCCURS NEXT, BUT MAY BE RE-ARRANGED.  THIS RECURRING SITUATION COMES UP FREQUENTLY BECAUSE I AM INVESTIGATING (WRITING ALMOST AS QUICKLY AS I DISCOVER THE MATERIAL) NETWORKED ORGANIZATIONS AND THEIR WEBSITE CLAIMS AND CONSIDERING WHERE THESE FIT INTO, FOR EXAMPLE, THE HISTORY OF THE RAPID PROLIFERATION OF NIH INSTITUTES AND CENTERS, AND FUNDING FOR THE SAME.

So, after several days’ work on this one, I’m going to publish it at 11,100 words, but expect to move some sections around, including to or from the next post in the sequence.  Currently the content here may be more or less directly tied into post title.  Taken as a whole, however, I am continuing to bring the topics into a “systems view.”

Written much earlier and included here is a whole section dealing with a Princeton/Columbia/ Brookings connection around the social science themes of marriage/fatherhood promotion and study, including who is married to whom, and a closer look at one of the Princeton Center for Child Wellbeing’s foundation funders (Thoman-Bendheim) and as associated with the Leon Lowenstein Foundation.  I had been viewing the banner to the website over a long time (it rarely changed), and finally looked up the benefactor/s named on it.  (Scrolling help — look for the Future of Children logo)

I did this for a more familiar (to readers of this blog) example of other well-coordinated, “entrenched circles of power” who manage to steer federal HHS funding where they feel appropriate, year after year.

The story of NIH, the tobacco litigation settlement of 1998 and major players in it, and of the role of Mary Lasker is well-documented and fascinating, and it’s “current events.”   “Big Tobacco Fuels Nicotine Replacement Addiction” by Lizzie Johnson (SF Chronicle staff writer).  We should understand the situation and the major players, and that there may be considerable spin on any part of it, or the whole thing.

[Quote and discussion/expansion from this article added post-publication, and is a candidate for off-ramping to another post]. It features a recently released UCSF study, the first individual quoted is Professor Stanton Glantz, and the section I quoted after that references the lead author in the study.  Interesting, the article provides no link to the study, or a searchable title to the study. Besides the title reference, “UCSF” is mentioned several times before introducing Professor Glantz’s name for a quote in para. 4.  Why not NAME the study in an article featuring the study, for readers’ benefit? The Center he directs was named…]

Big tobacco fuels nicotine replacement addiction, UCSF study shows
By Lizzie Johnson (in SF Chronicle) Updated 7:42 pm, Thursday, August 17, 2017

Para.1…”new research from UCSF says”  Para. 2…”according to a UCSF study released Thursday…” Para. 3….”UCSF researchers who reviewed millions of pages of internal tobacco company documents said” and finally, Para. 4…

“Those products should not be used unless they are done in the proper way,” said Stanton Glantz, an author of the study, professor of medicine at UCSF and the director of the Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education.


….“It was surprising to discover the industry came to view NRT (nicotine replacement therapy) as just another product,” said Dorie Apollonio, an associate professor in clinical pharmacy at UCSF and lead author of the study. “The tobacco companies want people to get nicotine — and they’re open-minded about how they get it.”

Representatives of RJ Reynolds, Philip Morris and British American Tobacco did not respond to requests for comment.

Apollonio’s researchers analyzed 90 million pages of documents from seven tobacco companies dating back as far as 1960, obtained in litigation against the tobacco industry.

Those papers showed that the tobacco industry began developing its own nicotine replacement products after its research showed that some smokers used them in addition to tobacco.

“The way the marketing is framed, it is explicitly discouraging quitting,” Glantz said. “The tobacco companies know more about tobacco products than anybody else. Now they are selling these products in a way that protects their market. I do not think most health professionals are aware of this.”

Stanton Glantz has been well-sponsored for the research, and in 2000 with another person from Tufts, authored “Tobacco War:  Inside the California Battles,” focusing particularly on California, available to read on-line, with a thorough table of contents and notes, here.  I found it by searching for an entity which showed up in one of the notes…(next image contains also the link, second one references the previous name of Americans for Nonsmokers Rights was “CNR” [Californians for Nonsmokers’ Rights?] and a 1980s strategy change for tobacco control movement (pass local ordinances) was adopted for nationwide use, successfully, and the author page gives some background as well as authors’ backgrounds. That also shows Professor Glantz was an NIH (and other agency) consultant.  Here, I’ve been talking about who’s running the NIH expansion itself.

So, a connection between Americans for Nonsmokers Rights (or its foundation) and one of the other USDOJ nonprofit-entity Intervenors does show up, but not with clarity.



Meanwhile, I am reminded of the comment from SmokersHistory.com of failure to disclose conflicts of interest in a publication, and referencing funding to UCSF Center, and Glantz’s research. I believe I’ve already posted this (see colorful image re: UCSF Center for Tobacco Control and Professor Glantz’s funding, with caption of this background color). I DNK which article the comments were referring to, however, many links are provided within the comment on undisclosed conflicts of interest in this field.

Quote re UCSF, Glantz undisclosed (in a paper) conflicts of interest — major funders of the UCSF Center and Prof. Glantz’ position include Robt Wood Johnson Fnd’tn (“RWJF”) and ALF (American Legacy Fndtn, which now goes by “Truth Initiative Fndtn” dba “Truth Initiative®) and is apparently processing litigation settlemt payments..

 

I think the point just above was well-stated, this was transcribed from the image (with caps intact):

Public health policies are being made as a result of these studies.  State and Federal laws were created as a result.  Worse yet, Public Health fails to protect those who depend on non-biased reporting.  It does science a grave injustice.  Furthermore, there should be journalistic ramifications for failing to disclose conflicts of interest, especially when these findings are used to validate laws and create policies.  I believe grants, such as the ones listed above, represent conflicts of interest and that authors who fail to disclose their competing interests should be suspended from publishing in these journals.**

**The journal in question here was PLoS (Public Library of Science).  Among the footnoted links for the quote (not all still work; feel free to test them all) was :

http://today.ucsf.edu/stories/american-legacy-foundation-honors-glantz-with-distinguished-professorship/ | Not being able to find it (probably because I forgot to update the entity name to “Truth Initiative” from “American Legacy Foundation”), I looked for the award separately, and found an unusual “Churchmouse” blog in the UK, “Churchmouse” being licensed under Creative Commons, called “Tobacco Control: 1994 —the Year Stanton Glantz feared for his funding.”  It links to his 2009 acceptance speech for something else, referencing the earlier one, and quotes him extensively.

This blogger is concerned about inappropriate, unlinked, and no-due-credit-given quotation (i.e., plaigiarism).  As a blogger, I understand and have dealt with some of it.  So, I’m only posting the image (which also contains a clear reference) and trusting that readers will follow through and with me make a note that

  • (1) Professor Glantz is not an MD; his degree was in something entirely different, with post-doctorates in different fields, and
  • (2) the rest of the article, including cite to the Helena, Montana study as if its results were scientific (confounding causes — on a small sample — of reduction of heart attack patients, which may have a variety of causes, with it being from reduction of smoking, or second-hand smoke), as well has his commentary about being concerned about losing funding during a Republican-controlled Congress… (and so forth).

In addition to the image below, this is one quote from it:

It is unclear what Engineering Economic Systems refers to. Is it that he has the competence to design — engineer — economic systems or is it a recognition that he understands economic systems within the field of engineering?

However, there is a larger question here: did you see anything unusual about Glantz’s degrees?

In an objection to an Ottawa regional smoking by-law, the smoking liberties group Forces Canada observed (emphases mine):

Disambiguation:  “mine” above doesn’t refer to “Let’s Get Honest” (i.e., me).  That link is out, but I see that “Forces, Inc.” or “Forces International” (both versions show at bottom of the web page, main domain name forces.org) is talking about anti-smoking as in general setting up invasive, authoritarian situation.  It also says it’s a nonprofit educational entity in Virginia, which — feel free to look up. This quotes the “About” on that domain:

FORCES columnists offer news and perspectives on such issues as smoking and public policy, smoking and science, and the increasingly evident slippery slope that is leading to tobacco prohibition. They also venture into adjacent territory to chart the course of an authoritarian and censorious political and bureaucratic elite that uses state-of-the-art propaganda techniques, corporate handouts and tax dollars to woo the public towards a vision of the future that offers utopian illusions about health and safety in exchange for the privacy and freedom of both mind and body.

The concerns of our columnists range from a detailed examination of local legislative issues to broader philosophical considerations touching, for example, on the gradual (and decidedly undemocratic) globalization of public health policy

This “who” page on same domain gives more background (started in 1995 in SF, and “FORCES” is an acronym.  Then the “International” registered in Virginia. http://www.forces.org/static_page/who.  I found a “Forces, Inc.” SCC# 051791763  registered in VA (Links to VA search pages) back in 1999, but images not available, and e-filing records only go back to 2010, and and oddly named “F.O.R.C.E.S., Inc.” in California, but only registered in 2016, and showing a different purpose.  I didn’t look further.

Background

FORCES is an acronym of Fight Ordinances and Restrictions to Control and Eliminate Smoking. That name reflects the organisation’s original intent when it was founded in 1995 in San Francisco, USA. When it became clear that smoking repression, and the use of “junk” science to justify it, was going well beyond the petty prohibition to smoke in public, and implied instead a fundamental subversion of professional ethics and social values on an unprecedented scale, the scope of FORCES greatly expanded, and so did its size, through many chapters and affiliates in the United States and around the world. We are proud of our grass-root origins, as we have always grown in full independence, free of subservience to any and all special interests.

(notice spelling of “organisation” despite it being a supposedly US (West Coast, East Coast) entity).

I share some of the same concerns (see underlined portions, those emphases are mine//LGH) or wouldn’t have quoted it here.  I also found it received 2003 notice and “dishonorable mention” in an American Journal of Public Health article by Tsoukalas & Glantz, found at NCBI (National Center for Biotechnical Information) under NLM (Nat’l Library of Medicine) under NIH.  See next image:

(Source URL shown on image and here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1447940/

 

Continuing the previous Churchmouse Campanologist quote….

In investigating this man, we obtained his Curriculum Vitae and were astounded to learn that Dr. Stanton Glantz is not a medical doctor, but has his Ph.D. in mechanical engineering. Dr. Glantz was also one of the authors of the EPA Report, as well as authoring a paper entitled, “Tourism and Hotel Revenues Before and After Passage of Smoke Free Restaurant Ordinances, 1999”, as well as numerous other papers on economic issues relating to no-smoking by-laws about which he can make no claim to professional competence – he does not have an economic[s] degree. However, Dr. Glantz has been an anti-smoking advocate since the 1960’s and clearly is NOT a medical doctor.

Glantz engineered the now-infamous Helena (Montana) ‘Miracle’ study which purported that cardiovascular arrest rates dropped significantly within a short time of a smoking ban having been implemented. These results have been extrapolated onto several other countries’ ‘successful’ results post-ban.

Current link to Professor Glantz’s UCSF page: https://tobacco.ucsf.edu/users/sglantz

Please note that the wordpress blog “About” describes Churchmouse Campanologist as a “Christian libertarian blog.”  My quoting it because it’s covered material I am interested in also (I was wondering why no “M.D.” as opposed to a Ph.D. while annotating the “Tobacco Wars: Inside the California Battles” image above also) does not make me a libertarian. As to Christianity, my faith and corporate religion as the latter inter-relates to my being a woman and survivor of religiously-justified battering (DV), after which non-religious family (my side) who were (p1ssed off at that), seem to have in a particularly amoral way gotten “even” in equally (just not directly physically) fields of control, harm — economic, psychological and consistent erosion/violation of basic human rights, not to mention a variety of court orders specific to my children, ex-, and myself when I separated in this great state of California, and non-specific as to person, but very specific as to action “separate but unequal” laws regarding what is and is not considered a criminal (felony) act in the same state) is as you may guess from this sentence, “complicated.” I do know that truth, like faith, when expressed well, often concisely, is stunningly elegant and beautiful, and typically truth holds across more than one context, and that the hunt for basic truth in one category (as if categories themselves were immutable) may relate to it in another. (See Albert Einstein for more on that topic!..).

Another one of the links in the “smokershistory.com” (annotated) image above was to a “Tobacco.org/rendezvous” with Steve Schroeder.  This next was found under its archives.  The website explains how the short, cyber-interviews asked 4 questions for each guest to respond by email, and the 5th one, an  open-ended, “anything else you want to add?”

Click image if needed, to enlarge, or search for “Schroeder” under the main (Archived) website: Archive.Tobacco.org/Resources/Rendevous.”

Getting back to this reference above (may need to click twice to access the image; click on the generic “pdf” icon that pops up if page doesn’t display at first).

naatpn-from-bhthechange-org-was-a-usdoj-tobacco-lawsuit-intervenor-but-looks-like-a-cdc-natl-netwk-partnerscreen-shot-2016dec30-8-17pm

As noted in the above NAAPTN annotated image from another website, none of the links (including “About”) seemed to have been active in December 2016, and that page no longer exists (in same location at least) although BHTheChange.org does. This was a search result on the organizational name at the time.  InternetArchive (Wayback Machine) results show very few for even the website BHTheChange.org (see annotations) and none for the specific one above:

Annotations explain the context. Understand that Internet Archive snapshots don’t reflect how often a website was updated or changed, however, the 2014-2017 timeframe is still recent. How many people comprehend the relationships between the funding of the website, and the inter-related nonprofits involved? Or how tobacco cessation and major funding for “Behavioral Management/Modification/ Mental Health” are now mainstreamed within federal health policy?

Looking in 2017 August at the same website,  this time around I did find an incorporated entity because (it took some real hunting, as financials are NOT posted), an EIN# was eventually divulged for the “National Council on Community Behavioral Healthcare, Inc.” (earlier designation, website shown on tax returns:  “BCCH.org”) or as it’s now called, simply “The National Council on Behavioral Health” dba “Mental Health First Aid,” which corresponds to a training program, apparently, they are marketing (one of the “DONATE” images below references it being “brought to the USA)

A dozen years later (FY2014) this same organization, EIN#23-7092671 with a name change, is spending more than its total gross receipts from 2002 on just a few subcontractors, one of them a long-time relationship. (Heavily annotated/colorful image with a blue&yellow star shows Pt VIIB (subcontractors) – Pt. VIII Revenues (Line 1, Contributions only)….and has two superimposed images for MTM Services, LLC, the highest-paid subcontractor that year. Below the image, I reference two other subcontractors (the three highest paid that year) and follow that trail where it clearly led — to more trademarked trainings being sold the public in the mental health field at a significant markup.  And a bit of “MIA” (missing-in-action, so far) contracts from the National Council to one of the subcontractors…and strangely-reported program service revenues from the subcontractor, “Mental Health Association of Maryland,”


Thorn Run Partners (the partners shown) most came from government employment (one even ran for legislature in Virginia), and were only formed in 2010.
Thorn Run Partners in DC. “Thorn Run Partners draws its name from partner Andrew Rosenberg’s historic farm located in New Creek, West Virginia.”  (IT shows offices in Washington (D.C.), Portland OR, Denver, and Los Angeles:

Thorn Run Partners is a recognized leader among the next generation of government affairs firms. By incorporating traditional lobbying, deep policy expertise and innovative communications capabilities in one client-friendly platform, TRP approaches every challenge with a truly comprehensive arsenal of skills, strategies and tactics. And at the end of the day, it’s all geared towards one, measurable outcome – our clients’ success.

TRP offers a seamlessly blended, and truly collaborative, team of policy experts and seasoned veterans of government service. Rare among government relations firms for its efficient size, bipartisan composition and multidisciplinary capabilities, TRP relies on experience, creativity and competence to achieve remarkable legislative and regulatory outcomes for its clients.

Our clients include large and mid-sized corporations, major investment funds, stakeholder coalitions, respected nonprofits, and local governments. We operate in multiple regulated sectors including Education, Energy, Financial Services, Healthcare, Technology, Telecommunications, and Transportation & Infrastructure.

Active in both Democratic and Republican political circles, our team understands the legislative process – and the politics of the process – and possesses the relationships necessary to be effective advocates for clients before Congress and the Executive Branch. With a keen understanding of the intersection between policy and public affairs, TRP also maintains key relationships with influential members of the Washington press corps, providing the opportunity to achieve earned media placements for clients that can lend support to their lobbying efforts. Additionally, experience with numerous governors and state officials enables TRP to successfully engage with various state governments, most notably Oregon, where the firm maintains an office.  (Then the statement about its partner’s ranch in Virginia)

I’m curious, because the National Council for Behavioral Health’s President and CEO is Linda Rosenberg (<==read!!), whether this is any relation.  From Thorn Run, Andrew Rosenberg’s wife is Jenny, he’s a different age, probably, than Linda Rosenberg, as this May, 2017 article pushing for universal mental health screening for ALL schoolchildren and partnerships between schools and mental health associations indicates, and no family relationship is identified so far.  However do notice that Linda Rosenberg (above link) takes credit for bringing “Mental Health First Aid®” on board the national organization….

Patrick Kennedy and Linda Rosenberg: Make children’s mental health a high priority
Posted Wednesday, May 10, 2017 4:03 pm (in “the Berkshire Eagle”)
By Patrick J. Kennedy and Linda Rosenberg

WASHINGTON — One in five children in the United States show signs of a mental health condition. In a class of 25 students, it’s likely that five of them will deal with depression, anxiety, substance use disorders or other adverse childhood experiences that make learning a serious challenge.

Remember, some posts back, I quoted another mental health or illness (MHA or NAMI, I DNR which) as saying one in four Americans has a mental health condition.   Now it’s one in five US children.

Most children — almost 80 percent — don’t get the mental health services they need.

That is why, together with other parents, educators and mental health professionals, The Kennedy Forum has developed a framework for building a comprehensive, integrated system to improve mental health services for children and adolescents across our country — some 74 million young people.

….Our parents’ generation suffered in silence with depression, alcoholism and too many other struggles. Our children’s generation can become the first to have universal access to treatment for mental health conditions. Every child deserves to enjoy a life of love and relationships, of contribution and meaning. Let’s make it so.

[By line of the article] Patrick J. Kennedy is the author of the New York Times bestseller “A Common Struggle: A Personal Journey Through the Past and Future of Mental Illness and Addiction.” He is the Founder of the Kennedy Forum and a former U.S. Representative (D-RI). Linda Rosenberg, MSW, is the president and CEO of the National Council for Behavioral Health. She has more than 30 years of experience in the development, design and delivery of mental health policy and services.

National Council for Behavioral Health Independent Subcontractor (FY2014) #3, above, for $521,047…

Mental Health Association of Maryland is running this program, training laypersons to assess emergency crisis and refer to services, and it shows clearly that Mental Health America (who I’ve blogged along with three other major mental health or illness organizations not too long ago, along with NASMHPD, NAMI, and DBSA) is an “affiliated organization.”  See the image:

Mental Health Association of MD (website) showing it’s running Mental Health First Aid USA® programming… it’s also listed as a “fulfilmt” (of this programming) org. paid over ½ million dollars by contracting with “the National Council for Behavioral Health” to do so, one of its top 3 subcontractors (out of 24 total) that year, FY2014…

Meanwhile, I don’t see that in FY2014, MHAMD.org’s tax return acknowledged $512K of program service revenues anywhere.  In fact, they only showed about half that which the tax returns categorized as “training fees” — doesn’t sound like the “fulfilment” description given by “The National Council” entity above on its tax return.  (excerpt from its first page showing summary info):

MHAMD.org, Form 990 excerpts, FY2014 (=calendar yr), EIN# 520591666, Image 1 of 6 (not necess in order)

MHAMD.org, Form 990 excerpts, FY2014 (=calendar yr), EIN# 520591666, Image 2 of 6 (not necess in order)

MHAMD.org, Form 990 excerpts, FY2014 (=calendar yr), EIN# 520591666, Image 3 of 6 (not necess in order)(REVENUES Lns 1&2 only)

MHAMD.org, Form 990 excerpts, FY2014 (=calendar yr), EIN# 520591666, Image 4 of 6 (not necess in order)(Liabilities to “MHFA partners”? Perhaps see a clue in the USPTO 3 partners who registered the MHFA trademark!

MHAMD.org, Form 990 excerpts, FY2014 (=calendar yr), EIN# 520591666, Image 5 of 6 (not necess in order) (teh only grant, $30,000, sent to MHA of Australia)

MHAMD.org, Form 990 excerpts, FY2014 (=calendar yr), EIN# 520591666, Image 6 of 6 (not necess in order) showing where the profits are being made (88% market up of inventories sold; they are running “Mental Health First Aid” trainings…

Their total gross assets, while much smaller than the National Council for Behavioral Health (shown below), are rapidly increasing recently also, per this:

Total results: 3Search Again.

ORGANIZATION NAME ST YR FORM PP TOTAL ASSETS EIN
Mental Health Association of Maryland MD 2015 990 37 $5,085,882.00 52-0591666
Mental Health Association of Maryland MD 2014 990 39 $3,513,206.00 52-0591666
Mental Health Association of Maryland MD 2013 990 34 $1,469,892.00 52-0591666

From $1.5M to $5M in just two years…more than tripled.  Take a look at FY2014’s (middle row).
Read the rest of this entry »

An Alternate Viewpoint on the Anti-Smoking / Smoking Causes Cancer! Campaign and its Syndicated (?) Backers incl. the Whiteheads, the Laskers, the NIH and the U.S. Congress (from SmokersHistory.com and Other Sources. See also Tobacco Lawsuits and 1998 MSA Settlement Funds ~~} American Legacy Foundation, now the so-called Truth Initiative®) (post started 7/31, published 8/5/2017)

with one comment

PREVIEW on a REVIEW:

An Alternate Viewpoint on the Anti-Smoking / Smoking Causes Cancer! Campaign and its Syndicated (?) Backers incl. the Whiteheads, the Laskers, the NIH and the U.S. Congress (from SmokersHistory.com and Other Sources. See also Tobacco Lawsuits and 1998 MSA Settlement Funds ~~} American Legacy Foundation, now the so-called Truth Initiative®) (post started 7/31, published 8/5/2017) with case-sensitive short-link ending “-7na”

(Section background-color reverts to this color after preview)

After working on this post and its background material for about a week, I’m publishing it “as is,” with an alert that it may be revised substantially after publication, or further split. It is a good read, however some of its information leads to awarenesses and understandings that are disturbing, if not shocking, on the scope of activities and reach (influence on government policies) by some of the people and organizations covered.

I wouldn’t expect it to be grasped in a single read anyhow. If there are substantial revisions (you’re reading one right now), the purpose is to clarify, or supply missing documentation to support some statements where a post-publication read may reveal the need.

Some areas in this post newer to me, others not entirely new, but not my main area of research (such as the details of the tobacco class action and RICO litigation, although I have looked at periodically and am aware of it as a force in social services programming — such as the First 5-type funds —  at the state levels).** On other areas (backgrounds of some of the greats in psychology or public relations — this post adds a key advertising great name) I may sound more authoritative because I have done more research on them  over the years, as it intersects/overlaps with “Family Court Matters.”

** USDOJ Tobacco Lawsuits and Settlements (Just a~First 5~Footnote to the 2016 TOC Intro. (a Page with WordPress-generated, case-sensitive shortlink ending “-5e8” published Dec. 2016.  Added to the sidebar near top of “Vital Links/Info” menu in Aug. 2017.)

However, probing this new area and historic account of major system movements referenced by the website “SmokersHistory.com,” I am seeing people, foundations, and systems transformation characteristics in common with material I’ve already processed in and around this blog.  If I’d not seen the commonality, I would probably not have referenced so prominently the “smokershistory.com” post, especially not even knowing who its author is.  Because just now I do not know, and because of some of the angry tone of that website, I felt obliged to look further, and more independently at at least its claims which resonated as reasonably probable with what I already knew.

In the process, I ended up learning more about key foundations and people, as well as about organization of the NIH, the NCI (National Cancer Institute) and putting some serious timeline and dates to changes within the NIH, which is to say, also within HHS.  I’m confident most readers also will.  I also found it reassuring not to be the only person (many MIT faculty were asking the same question in the early 1980s) (NYT article links below) asking just HOW MUCH of our current universities and current federal agencies is really “up for sale to the highest bidder,” and how reliable is conflict-of-interest-funded science? Is that what our nation needs?

Answering all these questions is not just a matter of posting links and throwing them up in the air, hoping they come down in some sort of order.  It is a LOT of reading; this type of reading involves processing the information as it comes up with an awareness of reasonably objective (vs. name-calling, or personal-values-laden) categories and at a minimum the ability and willingness to look at tax returns, comparing one to another within organizations or across organizations, and an awareness what decision-making by the very-well-endowed may affect in a given year, whether the “Total Assets” are very very big and growing, or while still large by many standards, being spent down.  And an awareness that when the issue (goal) is steering the direction of a federal agency along with the future of a certain are of scientific research, those determined — with each other — rarely operate through just one organization, foundation, or media at a time.

It takes time, and its part skill, part “art” in the sense of a developed skill over time. I look forward to, ideally, connecting conversing with more people who are willing to use some of these skills and willing to encourage/exhort/persuade others that they are basic to comprehending government — with regard to our individual AND collective relationships to it.  Unfortunately (?), when it comes to many advocacy groups (especially in some well-worn ruts within the family court reform advocacy arena) what I know better is where NOT to find such people, or exhaust personal energies attempting to reason with people who for years have continued to demonstrate that group-membership/brainwashed state on the chosen cause is, like old blue jeans conformed to one’s body countours, just more “fun,” or standing apart, too scary.



Previous and related post: Who? (besides Harvard, MIT and other Boston-based Institutes) is Funding and Promoting/Soliciting for Personal Genomics (volunteer your personal, identifiable, genetic code for a global database to be shared internationally) — GET Research (fine-tuning and equipping the Nature vs. Nurture debate) as Essential for Global Public Health Issue? (title’s short-link ends “-7m3”; published 7/31/2017)

This post was inspired mostly by the urge to report on the confluence and long-term influence of two) organizations involving two family lines.  Those two family lines are the Whiteheads and the Laskers, and the two organizations (who both also show close connections with a third organization the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research, EIN#061043412) are the Albert & Mary Lasker Foundation (EIN#131680062, with another trust which poured is assets into them on dissolution; see next table below*) and the other, much smaller but well-connected (with Congressmen on board, literally) Research! America (<==EIN#521609875, link to FY2015 Form 990; see next image).” (for contrast, FY2005 Form 990):

Rsrch!America Form 990 FY2005 (10 yrs earlier) showing highest paid fees-for services (see CATEGORIES) and employees (2 diff’t categories). This year Mary Woolley’s salary was 310K + benefits.

Rsrch!America Form 990 FY2005 (10 yrs earlier) describing exempt-purpose activities.

Rsrch! America FY2015 “Additional” page from Form 990 describing PR activities. Not their largest expenses this year (see return for more info).

Porter-Novelli PR Business Agency Report 2015 (4/27/2015):

Former Unilever marcomms chief Christine Cea returned to the firm to lead its global consumer practice, based in New York. She previously worked in Porter’s London and New York offices from 1999 to 2005. Ted Sabarese joined as regional creative director for North America, focused on content strategy, development, and production, as well as advertising, experiential marketing, and design. He previously worked at Chobani. … Amy Nicole Nayar took up the newly created role of SVP of global health and wellness and lead for longtime client Johnson & Johnson. She previously ran a consultancy called Forefront Leadership.

Growth in North America
The North American region grew the fastest in 2014, with New York serving as the impetus after the office added work from Pfizer, Merck, and other blue chips in the healthcare space, expanding digital and analytics work, and a communications brief for The Shops at Columbus Circle.   Read more at [PRWeek.com/article/1344304]

 

With Porter-Novelli a main contractor of Research! America in 2005, and William D. Novelli on the board (1h/week unpaid) at Research! America, I decided to look further.

I found he was CEO of AARP 2001-2009 (severance pay of over $1M protested there, next image) and “his LinkedIn” (another image) shows that, besides co-founding Porter-Novelli and running it (1972-1990) he also founded “Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids” and ran it 1995-1999.  See where I’m going with that?  He’s now professsor of “Global Social Enterprise Initiative” (“GSEI”) at “George McDonough School of Business” at the prestigious Georgetown University(since 2011)… While there I see that Georgetown also started, looks like around the same time, a “Global Human Development Initiative”  (<=link to Novelli as faculty on it) stemming from the “Jesuit ideal of using knowledge to serve society” and an “initiative” (guiding paradigm) crossing different schools and degrees within the university. (use that link to access the “About” page on the GHD). It says in part:
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

August 5, 2017 at 8:35 pm

Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011)

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Who? (Besides Harvard, MIT and Other Boston-area Institutes) is Funding and Promoting/Soliciting for Personal Genomics (volunteer your personal, identifiable, genetic code for the PGP, a global database to be shared internationally) — GET Research (fine-tuning and equipping the Nature vs. Nurture debate) as Essential for Global Public Health? (publ. 7/31/17)

with one comment

Who? (besides Harvard, MIT and other Boston-based Institutes) is Funding and Promoting/Soliciting for Personal Genomics (volunteer your personal, identifiable, genetic code for a global database to be shared internationally) — GET Research (fine-tuning and equipping the Nature vs. Nurture debate) as Essential for Global Public Health Issue? (title’s short-link ends “-7m3”; published 7/31/2017)

[ “MIT” added to the title at some point, but not the internal record of the title.  With MIT’s involvement with both the Broad Institute (named on its corporate papers in MA) and the Whitehead Institute (which calls itself independent, but uses “MIT” in its website URL(!)), it’s “not just Harvard.”


Well, just the other day I learned more about one of the terms in the post title in the typical way — while updating one post, referring to one website in passing, I took a second, closer look at other parts of the website (“conferences” link), which revealed both the GET conferences and the name of a nonprofit sponsoring them. That’s how “GET” and “PersonalGenomes.org” came up to my attention.

So, in this post expect to hear about:

~|~ PgEd.org ~|~ PersonalGenomes.org/Open Humans Foundation ~|~  the GET conferences ~|~volunteer your personal genetics” solicitation as a recurring theme ~|~ (leaving aside the Broad Institute for a while) more on the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research (“Whitehead Institute”) ~|~ and Treatment Advocacy Center (“TAC”) associated with the Stanley Medical Research Institute (“SMRI”) ~|~ Which of the above have (as it applies) boards of director personnel, funders and/or it seems, well-coordinated purposes in common.

~|~ And several images + a table tax returns, because of their support of the Human (and “Personal”) Genome Project, the Coriell Institute for Medical Research (formed 1953, it says, in Camden, NJ). They provide the Biobank, cell lines (and more), funded by, currently it says, seven NIH awards.

I talk about and show some of their financials, and how at least one them went to special efforts NOT to show them, at least on the main website while promoting its cause, scientists, research, and outreach (and soliciting more support, preferably $10K at a time or more). I took a short enough (hopefully) look at the source of Whitehead wealth in the sale of the clinical diagnosis instrument company (“Technicon”) to Revlon in 1980, and what happened to Revlon not long after — because it’s interesting, and relevant.


When and Where? Of these, PersonalGenomes.org/Open Humans Foundation and The Whitehead Institute (“WI.MIT.edu) are in the Boston area (although one of their legal domiciles isn’t in MA but NC) and PgEd.org web page gives contact address at Harvard Medical School Dept. of Genetics (PgEd.org doesn’t appear to be a separate entity), SMRI is in Bethesda MD, TAC which SMRI supports, is in Arlington, Virginia, and the Coriell Institute in NJ (website + tax returns don’t match).

The oldest entity in the list (until I added Coriell to it!) seems to be the Whitehead Institute, (<= EIN#061043412, that’s a link to an older Form 990, which I’ll show below, at Nine Cambridge Center, Cambridge MA)(website says 455 Main now) started in, says its Form 990, 1982.  SMRI (per tax return) started in only 2001, and, which is interesting, the TAC, three years earlier, 1998.  Coriell started in the 1950s..

In this post, you will also hear about two more entities who have worked side-by-side for decades to shape government-sponsored research in particularly cancer (smoking cessation), heart disease, biomedical research into genetics, and to push for more and more NIH funding:  

~|~ Research! America (est. 1989), and ~|~ the Albert & Mary Lasker Foundation (it seems 1974)

Briefly, how they came up.

When the Whitehead Institute’s famous founder is looked at, and through basic Google search on my part (I didn’t know who he was…), this also brings up his participation/founding of Research! America (inc. 1989, a VA-based entity with a D.C. legal domicile — and apparently some legislators (or at least “Hon.’s”) on its board over time)*, with its push for doubling NIH funding for biomedical research in five years, and in general PR for BioMedical Research (incl. on stem cells) as a public and global health benefit.

I put that discussion (several annotated images from its timeline) towards the bottom of the post, but it will pull together, I believe other parts of the narrative in a timeline. The website gives a timeline of events, and shows how many other foundations (incl. Bill & Melinda Gates, Robert Wood Johnson, and others, and not a few Congressmen, were involved, and spinoff organizations (at least two 501©4s) in pulling this off.  Where I found this information was on a multi-page, all-text, highly linked (although some have expired) and detailed tracking of networked families, companies and foundations, especially related to the anti-smoking campaign (American Cancer Society), America Heart Association, and pushing money towards biomedical research.  I spent hours (in fact, a full work day just reading, not writing) looking at this after the first exposure nearly a week ago, when I looked at certain parts of it.

It challenges the paradigm — the public promoted website purposes– but in the process uses some volatile and at times offensive language (bilge, shucksters, Nazi fascism of the health system, pseudoscience and more), BUT it also resonates and as an interpretation makes sense with information outside the website, and my strong gut instinct that some things are drastically wrong with the overall picture.  It definitely got me looking further, and more understanding on previously covered topics, as well as on new ones.  I have a title (short version, long version) and a start on that write-up (post in draft status Now Published), at:

 

Much as I enjoy looking at the detailed and colorful photos of cells, or hearing about the discoveries in scientific fields, including genetics…and in part because of the prominence of the Whitehead Institute (and with it, Edwin C. Whitehead, his surviving son John, and other siblings till on the institute’s board of directors (Susan, Peter), I still feel responsible to bring up alternate views of both the above organizations, and their founders’ (and friends’) overall purposes, and how they achieved them.

* (by recall from review of the Research! America returns)

  • the Hon. Paul G. Rogers (d. 2008)
  • the Hon. John Edwards Porter
  • the Hon. Louis H. Sullivan
  • not to mention also former US Surgeon-General, C. Everett Koop.

About Whitehead Institute (pausing to note its website is at MIT):

Whitehead Institute is based at MIT,** but as a separate nonprofit; famous originally for its major contribution to the Human Genome Project.

**Notice MIT’s “About” page (READ!!) mentions the Human Genome project and CRISPR, also its summary of current initiatives and projects, and estimate of $1.9 trillion annual revenue generated by its alumni (over 130,000 — MIT started in 1861 –). That was a 2014 estimate. )

Current research and education areas include digital learning; nanotechnology; sustainable energy, the environment, climate adaptation, and global water and food security; Big Data, cybersecurity, robotics, and artificial intelligence; human health, including cancer, HIV, autism, Alzheimer’s, and dyslexia; biological engineering and CRISPR technology; poverty alleviation; advanced manufacturing; and innovation and entrepreneurship.)

So Whitehead Institute’s location within MIT as a free-standing 501©3 school is a very big deal!)

Another on-line source referencing Mr. Whitehead’s work mentioned the Albert & Mary Lasker Foundation (est, 1974?) as involved in some of the same politics and public health promotions (although around a different cause), so within the past few days, I was also looking at its website, board of directors, and you betcha, tax returns.


BLOGGING CONTEXT/TIMELINE ON THESE TOPICS:

Over time and two related (but not consecutive) FamilyCourtMatters.org posts I have shown several of these institutes’ (entities’) tax returns in table format, so people might see:  Total Assets, State, and (if they clicked through) on page 1 of any individual return, (for Form 990 filers, and only FY2008ff for them — Form 990PFs for private foundations don’t show this, or Form 990EZs…) a year of incorporation and related website if identified on the Form990’s header info.), and quickly (from page 1 summary) whether its main revenues were contributions, program services revenues, or something else (such as investment-related income, whether from dividends or sale of assets at a profit).  In general this locates any organization in time, space, characteristics and size, activities as told the IRS (not the public) including whether it bothered to follow IRS form instructions.  It also reveals if looked at further, or earlier returns are checked out, subcontractors, if there are grantees, related organizations, and where they are holding their assets.

The two related posts (I’ll link to these again further below, in the same format):


These are my most closely related recent posts: #1 posted 7/23 and updated 7/24-76:


With similar, multi-component title reflecting how many components (institutes, websites, elements) there are to these situations, although two university names continue to come into play: Harvard, and UCBerkeley,  #2, posted 6/18/2017:

Related post name and shortlink Speaking of Projects and Nonprofits Funded by The Broad Foundation…. How about The Broad Institute (and its role in waging Patent Wars over CRISPR (Gene Perturbation, RNA/DNA cutting-edge research) with UCBerkeley?)(case-sensitive short-link ending “-720” that “0” is a zero, not O as in “Ohio.”).  (Published 6/18/2017)

…..And of course, MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

Whitehead Institute

Just one of its tax returns gives several points of reference you won’t find on “Wikipedia,” or most likely analyzed on its own website. Patience, please! with a bit of tax return show-and-tell. These “factoids” shown from Forms 990 provide a series of good mental “memory tags” helpful in putting time, size and place on any organization points of comparison (like an “LCD,” lowest common denominator) relative to other institutes/nonprofits and its position relative to public funds.

  • Without objective, basic “quantifiable” points of comparison outside the self-descriptions on the websites, or personal knowledge (eyewitness) experiential information of the programming or professors, directors (etc.) of ALL members of the entities working the field, how can they be understood, outside of hearsay and PR? They are not “the whole story,” but they give all other stories a basic structure.  “Read my lips!  Read the 990s
  • WITH such points of comparison, there is at least a basis for conversation or discussions with people who may not share common experiences, or outside one’s professional niche/s or “expertise.” It’s a descriptivevital language (including vocabulary) for transmission of meaning across time and distance. It helps with categorization and understanding of reality — including the reality of public economic support of private infrastructure.  This language is apparently NOT meant for common understanding across the US population.  Instead, we are often given promotions and propaganda to justify public policy and the costs. (This point added post-publication during a review).
  • What’s in common with other for-profit industries working with the organizations towards a global or public health goal? For assembling any concept of who’s been doing what, and to a degree, how (financially) and under what cause (which any public (vs. private foundation) 501©3 must state as its program purpose, that is, reason for existing in the first place), getting to the tax returns before the website rhetoric cannot hurt.
  • One thing I also tend to notice on any “for the public good” organization website is how forthcoming is it about its own financials (especially the 990s) as opposed to advertising “G&S” (Goods & Services) and soliciting donations or participants, i.e., selling.

The Whitehead Institute hasn’t posted an annual report since FY2014 (I write in nearly August 2017) and not one Form 990 is shown.  Getting even to the Annual Reports is a reach, and there are no posted audited financial statements anywhere on the site, that I can see.   Look at the top and bottom of the home page; between this like a newspaper layout of awards or recognitions for its famous people involved or their accomplishments.  I have no problem with that — BUT not when financials are omitted, or even a reference to the EIN#.  Many organizations will post this — why doesn’t this one?

To show this, I’ve annotated the next two images from the top and the bottom of the main page, one from the donor form, and a single image from their magazine which “special” donors (who give from $2.5 – $10K) get.

The website has beautiful, colorful and intriguing images from their research, and plenty of their people also.  My annotations on the image obscure much of that.  If you want to see the vivid pictures without all my notations, go to the main website which is easy to remember:  WI.MIT.edu!

To ensure I wasn’t making a false claim either here, or on the annotations about the “MIA” financials, I went also again to the “Support” Page (another place sometimes an EIN# may be mentioned).  Of course I have their EIN# already, but the point here is, does the W.I. think it’s worth a token gesture or not?  That answer is:  “Not!”  Even a link labeled something like “Financials 2014” under that Support menu looks like a single page (fine print) from the Annual Report, with two piecharts and a list of personnel.  That is not the only place some of the labeling and statements are vague and misleading.

A good question might be:  If this is how the institute handles communications and solicitations — i.e., misleading statements and labels, missing information which the public deserves to know — how reliable is their scientific statements and information? (I have the same issue with more than one organization in the “~|~” -marked list, above). Of course, I have no scientific expertise to judge, or reason to suspect that the science behind this institute is less then stellar.  BUT, my other comments stand.  Its failure to divulge financials I believe is odd and inappropriate. Having looked at the tax returns already, I suspect that one motive might be not wishing the public who might donate more to comprehend just how much public financing is already involved. Its failure to provide CURRENT annual reports as well (at least) is also disrespectful, and the organizational history narratives, spread over many pages, are designed not to go very far in depth, and are notably absent backup links.  

I noticed this tone and quality on the website from the start; it bothered me knowing what level of diligence and detail must occur for the level of science (and technology) taking place both here, and at the prestigious MIT.  I think it is disrespectful overall, and smacks of arrogance and condescension — while I am, as who wouldn’t be, still interested in the discoveries and descriptions of those discoveries in the field.

This is NOT a valid format OR substance for presentation of significant financial information. Nor is any offer made how to contact the organization and get these.  Apparently, we’re not supposed to think about these things, but what a privilege it is to be involved, and support it out of pocket. The impact of this will be seen when (a) you look at the Whitehead Institute’s tax return (one provided below), and (b) when you read about Research! America’s push for doubling that NIH funding within five years (said to have been achieved by 2003). It’s entirely fair, when being solicited in conditions like this, and honest, for any U.S. citizen to say, “I already gave at the office!” because we did!

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

July 31, 2017 at 9:01 pm

Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011)

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Broad Institute (MIT, Harvard, TBF*, 2008) and Stanley Family Foundation (see MBI, Inc.)-funded Center for Psychiatric Research (“schizophrenic, bi-polar”) Testing and Treatment Advocacy (“TAC”) and Gene-Editing (CRISPR-Cas9) USPTO Patent Wars with UCBerkeley et al. (written 6/15/17, posted 7/23/2017)

with one comment

Post name and shortlink: The Broad Institute (MIT, Harvard, TBF*, 2008) and Stanley Family Foundation (see MBI, Inc.)-funded Center for Psychiatric Research (“schizophrenic, bi-polar”) Testing and Treatment Advocacy (“TAC”) and Gene-Editing (CRISPR-Cas9) USPTO Patent Wars with UCBerkeley et al. (written 6/15/17, posted 7/23/2017). I expect to do minor editing (addition of tags, a few more images, and checking the display (layout)) within next 48 hours after posting…


This post had a preview, published in June, with similar, multi-component title reflecting how many components there are to these situations (and, institutes):

More info on/from the “Speaking of Projects and Nonprofits” post:

That post also looked at a website “PgEd.org” supposedly helping educate readers on basic concepts (genotype v. phenotype) although on closer look, doing a good job of soliciting for participants and (if I recall it right) PR for the cause.  It’s located at Harvard Medical School Dept. of Genetics (i.e., NOT a separate 501©3?  Only a thorough search would say for sure), but acknowledges a recent “generous contribution” from Professor Jennifer Doudna.  On closer examination of the PgEd.org page (in that post) I showed how it’s more promotion than education (poor definitions, circular references, in between plugs for participation in getting personally genome-sequenced…)

PgED links to GETed conferences (started in 2010?) which go global, and are hosted by a 501©3 “PersonalGenome.org” started only in 2005 (at Harvard Med School).  Again, they want volunteers to give their personal data and for it to be shared globally and across institutions.  Meanwhile, The Broad Institute wants those CRISPR patents… The PersonalGenomes.org simplified website, to its credit, does post under “Donate” its own street address, IRS status and even EIN# 26-2973607 but, shamefully (it’s been now a dozen years!) not one Form 990 or audited financial statement.

There is no “financials” page. Having browsed their very few Form 990s (2008 first –> current) and seen employees ranging from “0” to “4” and a board of only 6, with minimal contributions until a single $1,000,000 grant given 12/31/2011 (and afterwards, times of running in the red nevertheless) I can see why they may not be encouraging a closer look. Then in 2015, organization changed its name to “Open Humans Foundation.”  This website DOES post prior Forms990 (and reference the namechange). Another surprise: its legal domicile is North Carolina, not MA.


(NC filing shows timing of the name change).

 

Only registered for MA in 2012…(per state-level websites recording corporation names in both states.

Note:  These typically come with disclaimers, but a search will show that on-line as of today (7/26/17 by now).  Also interesting — in neither state were annual reports showing as filed.  First, it didn’t file them (at least visible on-line, see “disclaimer” comment) for several years in NC, then after 2012, it didn’t file for four more years, until 2016.  Guess if there’s enough professionals, MDs, PhDs, or important people on the organizations, they don’t have to obey normal laws regarding nonprofit registration, and corporate annual reports at the state level??

Same EIN#26-2973607 Diff’t Name. (Open Humans Foundation in Boston, formerly “PersonalGenomes.org”). The indication “MA” as legal domicile (Header Info, bottom-right) doesn’t match Business Entity records in MA or NC, which say it’s NC…

Same EIN#26-2973607 Orig. Name, Form 990EZ for 2008; this form doesn’t prompt for legal domicile…

 

This section and info. was added post-publication on 7/26/2017 (along with the Two Tax Returns excerpts and “PgEd.org” images extending below this section’s border) and will be discussed separately, soon. I’m just bringing it up here to “prime the pump” for a future post.

PgEd.org home banner (a Project of Harvard Med. School Dept. of Genetics) says it got a generous contribution from UCBerkeley’s (See “Doudna Lab”) Professor Doudna (Harvard + MIT’s and TBF’s “The Broad Institute” meanwhile warring with UCB (and Prof. Doudna) over CRISPR patents). No caption, no date on the pix…how “educational.”

PgEd.org home banner (7/2017). Emphasis on personal genetics + sequencing.

PgEd.org home banner (a Project of Harvard MedSchool Dept. of Genetics

PgED: Alfred P. Sloan Fndtn, Sundance Festival into it too…(No caption, no date, on the photo. How “educational”…)


(MIT, Harvard, TBF,* 2008)” refers to the leadership (per its inc. papers available at Commonwealth of Massachusetts business entity search site). “2008” refers not to “TBF” but to The Broad Institute’s incorporation date. I mention this because records show that just before 2008, TBF changed its accounts (EIN# and legal entity registered with the state, as I recall, as next paragraph mentions.  I wonder if the two planned events were somehow related.

This also affected or related to filings regarding (but not the topic of this post) two other, much smaller, Broad-funded nonprofits active in training individuals urban school leadership with a view towards its reform. That seems a lot of shifting identities shortly before the major recession IN 2008. (Those nonprofits featured training of school leadership.  See previous posts.)

*TBF = “The Broad Foundation,” which as “it” changed EIN#s ca. 2006-07, but specially IRS-ruled “not a termination,” fiscally (or, at minimum two different entities associated with/filing under two different EIN#s), I guess one might say it was a paranormal succession of two-into-one foundations, with some name-shifting between which was the d/b/a of the other.  (I posted on it earlier, some images here for reminders). Not the main point in this post, except for the ability to pull off some phenomenal societal shifts, when there’s enough financial and famous philanthropic names weight to be thrown around, with friends and associates, towards causes they believe in.


Like many philanthropists, Eli and Edythe Broad are active in many areas — the arts, education, architecture, development, and for purposes of this post, scientific research with a focus on the biomedical, genetic, psychiatric and the Human Genome with a view towards applications.

It’s a fascinating field, it’s a mark of this century (and the last part of the 20th), and even just the technology facilitating study or experimentation in it, is a whole other story.  If I weren’t doing this blog, I’d be interested in that field in general and as it intersects with our family line which seems to have a scientific streak (as well as manipulative, bullying streak) somehow “bred into” it.  But in blogging it here, my focus after posting some of the fairly recent news, is still on reconstructing the “genealogy” and “DNA” of its major philanthropic and university (collaborating) investors/funders and funding families.

Blogger comments re: timing of this post (see title).  Other than this update, and adding information on one more institute (Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research — at MIT, but its own EIN# since the 1980s, say its tax returns) and that is a short post, for a change!

I have been working and focusing hard for more than a month to update the “Do You Know Your…” theme in three major parts, and ancillary posts.  These are major networked nonprofits, each with its own tax returns — many parts, and a patterns developing over time within them, each with its websites, and all with their sponsors, and interrelationships.

#4 from USTreasury OCC’s BankDerivatives Rept March08

I needed a mental break and “time-out” for a bit from that subject matter and clicking through the same websites over and over to dredge out the pieces of the puzzle.  I enjoyed the detail (especially on the state CAFR and US Treasury reports), but the drudgery of poorly-organized, repetitive posts and finding more and more evidence of “skullduggery” in the nonprofit sector with not one, but several different organizations…  It’s not without its rewards (like increased understanding), but while study and posting on a single topic, I am immersed in that subject matter, sometimes to the point of dreaming about posting on it, or discovering key points about them.  

So having accomplished several legs of this project I decided to return to the previous topic here for a while, around themes and organizations listed in post title.   It’s also a fascinating one.  The “heavy lifting” on this post was already done.  I’m not re-viewing the content in detail (I did re-read it), but am adding some on the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research organization mentioned on the Wikipedia which I believe puts the development of the Broad Institute in some chronological perspective.
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

July 23, 2017 at 7:51 pm

Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011)

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

To Identify and UNDERstand is To Know Why (and How) to WITHstand. (The Public’s Assigned Place on the Tax Continuum Pecking Order). [from “Do You Know Your ABA, APA…?” Oct. 2014 Post Update @07/18/2017]

leave a comment »

Post title reflects both the subject, and part of the originating (updated) post title from which it was taken to shorten the original:

To Identify and UNDERstand is to know Why (and How) to WITHstand. (The Public’s Assigned Place on the Tax Continuum Pecking Order). [from “Do You Know Your ABA, APA…?” Oct. 2014 Post Update @07/18/2017]  (case-sensitive shortlink this time ends “-7dX”) (That post’s full title shown next…).

Like many of my posts, it will undergo some post-publication editing, usually for clarity or layout (how images display). [[In fact,  this next segment added post-publication update, on 7/19/2017.  I’ll mark where the added segment ends.]]

 [[Segment added post-publication update, 7/19/2017]]

The ongoing theme has been …”DO YOU KNOW YOUR NGA, NCSC, NCSL, NCSEA, NCJFCJ, NCCD, NACC,  NASMHPD, not to mention ICMA?” that is, do you know? about the network of private nonprofit associations named after public offices or officials who are networking together to function as government without being government entities? In this theme, drafted October, 2014 under basically that title, I split it into three basic parts, with the last (“Part 3”) about the ABA (Bar) and APA (Psychological).  I also wrote at length and an extra post about the pushing of the mental health/illness theme when it came to the NASMHPD (National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors) which is operating under a cooperative agreement with the “NGA.” (National Governors’ Association).

The NASMHPD is problematic through:  (a) involvement with the objectionable TMAP (Texas Medication Algorithm Project), a way of getting around failed clinical trials to promote excess and more expensive types of (unsafe, injurious it turns out) medication for use statewide, an area over which, obviously, groups like the NASMHPD would have some influence as its members are state-level heads of “Mental Health Programming.”  (b) in general, taking funding from some of the same “Big Pharma” (Rx) companies developing and pushing some of the drugs, including several who are now being sued by state attorney generals and others for their responsibility in current very unhealthy (except for business profits) opioid abuse epidemics and ===>>> (c ) patterns of networking AS nonprofits with a specific theme intended to go national, which brings it into an area I have now researched as to several different fields (including marriage/fatherhood, domestic violence prevention, child abuse prevention, supervised visitation and related, and more recently, school reform initiatives (public/private liaisons with big foundation money behind them).  I believe that the extent of such networking when it comes to mental health (and related Rx possibilities = major financial incentives to at times inappropriately control population, and bill the public for it) is pervasive and should not be ignored.  However, it’s the organizational tactics in the nonprofit sector (regardless of “theme”) to also be aware of, and how organizations copy other organizations’ successful models.

Another factoid is that many of these same pharmaceutical companies can ALSO sponsor or get to government officials more easily ( for membership or Corporate Donor/Partner fees  — which they can certainly afford to pay) — which brings us back to the NGA, NCSC, NCSL, etc. list above.  The fact that the organization (as to that list) is in the private sector makes it legal, and because these organizations themselves are not usually in the headlines AND on Forms 990, donations are aggregated, at least as far as public gets to see (i.e., contributions are lumped together into a single number on the return), harder to follow. The collective influence is also harder to see simply when it is dispersed among many entities. This influence is not less for being less seen — it still is there, but when results are showing up inappropriate, specifically WHERE to resist or protest should be known.  My point is, the nonprofit sector PER SE sets the stage for this.   The nonprofit sector understood as a factor of everyone else (incl. corporations) getting taxed, brings it back to the point of taxation, specifically the income tax.   

That’s also WHY the “CAFR” material is so important to grasp!

re: (a) TMAP (Texas Medication Algorithm Project) (just a reminder):

Two screenprints, one from TMAP Wiki (part not shown describes whistleblower Alan Jones’ experience, including being fired from his state’s OIG after reporting on this).  You can see readily how it would intersect with politics and government:

Annotation bottom right actually comes from p.2. Click image to access the 2-pager document (but p1 w/o annotation) as found at BHRM.org (in IL)

Texas Algorithm Project “wiki” (click image to see) also references the whistleblower and “New Freedom Commission on Mental Health” connections (i.e., from Texas governor George W. Bush to U.S. President George W. Bush (pls. read if unfamiliar with it!) [NOTE: WIKI References insufficient: 2 link to CCHR, one to AHRP (which quotes an Oct. 2005 Alan Jones interview w/ Rutherford Institute (VA, John Whitehead), link broken and no search site there. AHRP doesn’t post its financials (which I looked up to verify its statement that whistleblower Alan Jones was on its board) and I found a tiny and irregularly-filing NY entity, no Forms 990 [vs. 990EZ] showing (which’d show date founded) before ab. 2008, no return found readily before then either (perhaps filed Form 990-N). A 4th Wiki “Reference” viewed, it said, 2006, and not well framed, misdirected to a site MHC on “trucks” and the one to “Texas Dept. of Health” lacked specifics, leading readers to flounder (there are algorithms for many different diseases, not just the psychiatry-related ones for which TMAP became so (IN)Famous.

While I didn’t quote “CCHR,” in Los Angeles, formed in 1982, however for more info on the TMAP details, you can see its “psycho-pharma front groups” page.  (See organizations on its right sidebar).  Just be aware who you are dealing with (as I recall, which could be challenged, as having its roots in Scientology — in other words, rather than having people drugged up, perhaps it’s better the become “clear” through other means). (Or, see CCHR and its 6166 Sunset Blvd Los Angeles “Psychiatry: An Industry of Death” Museum opening, featured on Scientology.org). That said, they provide a lot of documentation, and are not the only people protesting TMAP, “Big Pharma” or in appropriate over-drugging of vulnerable populations under state control! I have quoted CCHR before, much earlier on the blog and in passing, probably re: the New Freedom Mental Health Commission.At least they post audited financials and Form 990s.  Mission description from a recent 990. (EIN#680005541):

THE CITIZENS COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS (CCHR) IS A NON-PROFIT, NON-POLITICAL, NON-RELIGIOUS MENTAL HEALTH INDUSTRY WATCHDOG WHOSE MISSION IS TO ERADICATE ABUSES COMMITTED UNDER THE GUISE OF MENTAL HEALTH. WE WORK TO ENSURE PATIENT AND CONSUMER PROTECTIONS ARE ENACTED AND UPHELD AS THERE IS RAMPANT ABUSE IN THE FIELD OF MENTAL HEALTH. IN THIS ROLE, CCHR HAS HELPED TO ENACT MORE THAN 150 LAWS PROTECTING INDIVIDUALS FROM ABUSIVE OR COERCIVE MENTAL HEALTH PRACTICES SINCE IT WAS FORMED OVER 48 YEARS AGO.


re: (c ) patterns of networking AS nonprofits with a specific theme intended to go national (just a reminder):

I  also looked at, if you read these (my) posts, other mental health/illness-named nonprofits, which have “umbrella” or “parent” organizations (Mental Health America, National Association on Mental Illness, now branded as “NAMI”) and “DBSA” (Depression Bipolar Support Association), including in “Even More Considerations on NASMHPD (and DBSA, and NAMI), and MHA.…”  Each of the above associations has spawned, launched, inspired, and helped support (including sometimes through direct grants ) the creation or organization of many — several dozen similarly-named (after originating nonprofit) for each, or more, for some, as I recall — but I did post sample screenprints showing the list– fiscally independent (filing their own tax returns, not under a group membership) and “unrelated” (NOT referenced as “related entities” on the main group entity’s tax returns — MHA, NAMI, or DBSA) nonprofits also, typically named after a state, metropolitan region, or county.**  Each entity may have different by-laws on how this works (for example, I believe it was NAMI which allowed only ONE state-level affiliate per state).  In other words, networks of “kinda/sorta related” organizations, but not really when it comes to the IRS.

**So does CCHR (look at its organization-posted FY20015 Form 990, Schedule C (Schedules come after all Roman-numeral identified Parts of the Return, That is, I, II, III etc.), which provides a two-page list of affiliated entities all named “Citizens Committee on Human Rights” — and add a geography identifier (i.e. state or city name, etc.).  While there look at its Schedule B named contributors and see that one couple gave $886K and other individuals over $70K each such that ⅓ of its contributions/donations (See Pt I and Pt VIII) came from just a few people.  Advertising (Pt IX) occupied about ⅓ of its functional expenses, while a pittance (Sched I) was returned to affiliates and some to the Church of Scientology, nearby on the same street.  There  were some membership fees and there was some (Schedule F) recorded international activity.

The APA and the ABA are also so organized, which I also gave in sample screenprints in previous posts. My point is become aware of the networking in the private, nonprofit sector as organized nationally (or, internationally) targeting specific functions or services provided by government, with the purpose of controlling in which direction they are moved.  Also become aware of them as a financial force if and when their assets and investments are collectively pooled.  This happens in both the private and the public sectors, which also interact (trade, buy, sell, etc.) with each other.  This type of information isn’t “journalistic” and doesn’t tend to sell newsprint and may lack social media “curb appeal”– but it’s part of how our country operates, and has its core basis in WHERE one falls along the tax spectrum or continuum (exempt, or not).  It’s essential to know and come to terms with!

 [[This  ends a segment added post-publication update, 7/19/2017]]


I have been putting out some long posts recently.  But this one is shorter at about (with above addition, now) 8,800 words. It introduces the concepts from and links to some of my key prior posts on the same (I picked out five specific ones), then continues on a post that references them, published 07/12/2017, called Featuring Five Vital Posts on …. Our Assigned Places in the Tax Continuum Pecking Order (from ABA, APA post update).  That continuation post has more substance on the Five Vital Posts.  This one (that you’re now looking at) serves as an introduction, and has some extra material not on the continuation post (in light-blue background section).

The originating post itself actually I see reflected three major subject matters, although that length of title also reflected what was actually covered in the post three years ago.  The three subject matters are reflected in the post title’s three sentences:


THIS POST CAME FROM THE MIDSECTION OF A POST on the MIDDLE SUBJECT MATTER, BUT REFLECTS THE THIRD-SUBJECT MATTER IN THE LONG TITLE ABOVE — OUR PLACE ON THE TAX CONTINUUM PECKING ORDER, AND THINGS ABOUT TAX RECEIPTS, FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BUDGET FUNDING, AND CONSEQUENCES TO ONGOING TAXATION IN THE CURRENT SETUP (AS REFLECTED IN CAFRS, AND THESE NETWORKS OF NONPROFITS INTO “PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS” I KEEP SHOWING OVER TIME….SIMILARLY, the material for SECOND SENTENCE of the TITLE actually was towards the BOTTOM of the originating post.  So, some re-arrangement of sections was called for.

I have now published parts 1, 2, and 3 of the original, and, separately, an extension of this post (link appears again at the bottom) as Featuring Five Vital Posts on …. Our Assigned Places in the Tax Continuum Pecking Order (from ABA, APA post update) (with short-link ending “-7bR”).   <==almost 13,000 words, contains about 50% update and addition of images to explain concepts.

So this represents the last piece (Part 3 of 3 in effect) extracted from the original, with the important concept in its title:  To WITHstand one must UNDERstand.  On UNDERstanding, one begins to comprehend why one must WITHstand.

Read the rest of this entry »

Featuring Five Vital Posts on …. Our Assigned Places in the Tax Continuum Pecking Order (from ABA, APA post update)

with one comment

Featuring Five Vital Posts on …. Our Assigned Places in the Tax Continuum Pecking Order (from ABA, APA post update) case-sensitive short-link ending “-7bR”

I(Oct 2014 updated July 2017, Pt. 3B, i.e., taken from “Do You Know Your…ABA, APA (Founders, History, and via their Forms 990/O or Financial Statements, As Nonprofits?), Or How the ABA from its start maneuvered around existing suffrage for “men of color” long after women also got the vote? If Not, Then You Also May Not Yet Know Your [the Public’s] Assigned Place in the Tax Continuum Pecking Order.”

WITHIN that post, I extracted a section about conversations we need to have:  To Identify and UNDERstand is to know Why (and How) to WITHstand. (Public’s Assigned Place on the Tax Continuum Pecking Order, [from “Do You Know Your ABA, APA…?” Oct. 2014 Post Update]  (case-sensitive shortlink this time ends “-7dX”).  That brief post ends with a shortlink to this one (although without the fancy title).

That (short) post reminded readers of my Five Related Posts  from the Vital Links menu whose themes continue to prove relevant year after year, no matter which topic I seem to be researching or reporting on.  It also reminded and showed readers an interesting (and so far, typical) response to the relevance of the CAFR (Consolidated Annual Financial Reports) Mass Media Coverups when it’s brought to light.

THIS ONE was first started for technical (length, easier revision) purposes 7-7-2017.  All paragraph breaks had been wiped out…

There were also at least two length issues here.  One is me running my mouth in quasi-PTSD mode back in 2014 (a time of major household stress and transition as I had just outed relative probate/fiduciary abuse in the context of same relative’s prior involvement in undoing my work life via post-domestic violence separation’s family court litigation — on the opposing side, etc.)  Another length issue was technical blogging ability — at the time I hadn’t discovered how to use (smaller) screenprints, instead of quotes, and or begun using condensed fonts inside quotes, or lines to set them off from basic text inside boxes.  I hope to correct both without negating or erasing important content.  But some post “surgery” may be required here….

BUT, I WILL STILL CONVEY THE PRIMARY MESSAGES:


CAFRs as a system of reporting for government entities regulated by a tax-exempt nonprofit set up by the AICPA (American Institute of Certified Public Accountants) only began, at least as regulated by this tax-exempt nonprofit, in the 1970s, by which time post World War II government surpluses were really starting to accumulate (as well as personal fortunes made in wartime).

Key to CAFR coverup is accounting practices which separate “BUDGET” from many other funds, handle “General Fund” as though it was the main source of government receipts (it most certainly isn’t at the federal, state, and most other levels).  Being blissfully (??) ignorant of how to assess, see, or conceptualize just how many assets and in what forms, and under what funds, all levels of (USA – federal) (States — all 50 and territories) governments, plural, exist and where they are pooled, or where held separately, “the people” are easily fooled into accepting the constant talk of DEFICIT without regard to NET ASSETS or even GROSS ASSETS (and taking a look at how liabilities are accounted for).

The problem with showing this information is the “snooze” factor.  It’s not colorful, juicy, doesn’t have major photography involved; it requires actual dealing with numeric and categorization concepts (somewhat abstract) even though they really do apply to concrete situations — like how to make a city go bankrupt needlessly by changing accounting rules.

It also isn’t typically grasped with just 15 minutes of exposure, or maybe even a few days. Constant absorption of current events and news does NOT typically equip or condition a person to absorbing this type of information if one doesn’t already know how to.  Its impact is also so significant, there is a natural desire to go back to the “pristine” innocent belief that the problem wasn’t so fundamental.


The post “To Identify and UNDERstand is to know Why (and How) to WITHstand. (Public’s Assigned Place on the Tax Continuum Pecking Order, [from “Do You Know Your ABA, APA…?” Oct. 2014 Post Update]“(case-sensitive shortlink this time ends “-7dX”,) talks about conversations we (the public) should be having as part of normal basic, understanding of life in this country.  These conversations ideally should be with each other in places where we can view the same visuals, charts, and discuss them ideally face to face and ongoing, and with our own families or partners, or friends.  BUT, we have been conditioned NOT to talk about these things, and become focused and engrossed on other things instead.

Business owners who operated in this manner would go under, or get taken over because they are not paying attention to their bottom lines, or the current marketplace and climate — or finding and listening to others who can tell the truth about it.

This information IS “the bottom line” for people living here and subject to taxation, policies, conditions created by various entities, and propaganda, where it may be propaganda, about the where IS that bottom line, really — as a basis for setting future policy.

These more people should be having with each other are talks about money which take into account how the government sector interacts with the public (through taxation and tax-exemption), what’s done with tax receipts (how it’s shown in reports versus portrayed on the media), and how government entities differ from business entities organized under the same governments (guess which one is really on top?).  These conversations cannot occur without at least some basic vocabulary and a bit of “practice.”  That “practice” has to include some financial statements and tax return reading.

I have some very smart, articulate, well-educated friends, who I continue to respect.  Some may say they are no good with numbers, their minds don’t work that way.  How much of this is nature or nurture (or lack of nurture when it come to basic math) isn’t my business.

I realize some people are visual learners, but I refuse to believe there are not more people who are capable of thinking conceptually AND capable of comprehending consequences of having had significant information about how our own governments operate using their financial statements being withheld from the average person, and from open, and frequent discussion on-line and in social media.

Carl Herman, “Nonpartisan examiner” 7/3/2011, leading quotes (after link to a video) in “Debt-damned economics: Learn monetary reform or kiss your assets goodbye (Pt. 1 of 2)”. Accessible also from his article on the $600B fund that can’t fund $27B pension obligations, (below).

I wonder what is the psychological block to facing some of these facts, or understanding that they refer to things which often make headlines in the major media anyhow — for example, constant talk of underfunded pensions, pension liabilities making or breaking some major metropolitan city.  Again — Carl Herman (cited enough on this blog, probably on the post leading to this one) said it clearly enough and he’s not alone.  I just think he expressed it well — why hold over $600B assets (speaking of I believe CalPERS) when it doesn’t adequately fund pension contributions anyhow?  Here’s a paragraph from my lead-in post (with a little extra color for emphasis):

For an antidote, go read some Walter Burien (May 10, 2010, “Is our Government Bankrupt?…. Analogies are Fun to Use: Is the Columbian Cartel short of cocaine?“, Clint Richardson (July 20, 2013, “Detroit: The Latest Bankruptcy Lie” (hover-cursor for abstract, and read the top part, too)), or Carl Herman, who asks such questions as, “CAFR summary: if $600B ‘fund’ can’t fund $27B pension, $16B budget deficit, why have it?? (from his 2012 article) and, like the others, can also walk people through it, and has:

  • Interview: Game-changing CAFR trillions explained (Feb. 14, 2014)….These astounding funds are disclosed in official Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (CAFRs). Government and media “leaders” claiming no options but austerity while failing to honestly communicate surplus trillions is OBVIOUS criminal financial fraud . .

So, this post starts with a slight overlap (naming the five posts and reminding us to go check out the FMS Treasury.gov website (and/or its redirect) to view some reports.

Expanding on that commentary from Burien (2010) above, he gives an analogy (other than the rhetorical response — “Is the Columbian cartel short of cocaine?” which seems a good analogy for the situation! I added a screenprint, then a quote:
Read the rest of this entry »

martinplaut

Journalist specialising in the Horn of Africa and Southern Africa

Let's Get Honest! Blog: Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?...' (posted 3/23 & 3/5/2014). Over 680 posts, Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Red Herring Alert

There's something fishy going on!

The American Spring Network

News. by the people, for the people. The #1 source for independent investigative journalism in the Show-Me State, serving Missouri since 2011.

Family Court Injustice

It Takes "Just Us" to Fight Family Court Injustice

The Espresso Stalinist

Wake Up to the Smell of Class Struggle ☭

Spiritual Side of Domestic Violence

Finally! The Truth About Domestic Violence and The Church

%d bloggers like this: