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

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

“Scope of the Issue/Unholy Trinity” (10/2012) and “FAQs on CAFRs” (@7-5-2013)

with one comment

FNAQs.  (Frequently Not Asked Questions)Scope of the Issue:  Unholy Trinity of Excess Welfare Funds, Religious Zealots, and Social Scientists.  For Starters. (my October 19, 2012 post: Recommended Reading, Easy to Follow).

Case study on the first state (Oklahoma) that decided to nab $10 million in extra contingency welfare funding to promote marriage (which leads all over the map, but especially also to Colorado and Florida) — which brings up, among other questions,

  • how many other “contingency funds” of $10 million are sitting around, in which departments, and if so — why are we supposedly so broke?

  • Why are there so many people (married and unmarried both) on Food Stamps in 2012, when these programs started flourishing in 1999?

  • Does having all this excess cash sitting around in unused TANF contingency accounts

    • presumably being invested in corporate stocks, mutual funds, securities, earning profits — or, at a minimum
    • eve just sitting around (for how long?) earning compound interest than the people it was otherwise destined for could ever earn
    • (only to be appropriated by the executive level State Leadership (Typically Governor and the head of the state HHS are among the leadership; also see Chief Justice of any State Supreme Court))

… have any direct connection to the radical restructuring of WELFARE in 1996? Was that perhaps the real purpose all along of that restructuring to get extra cash away from individual citizens, impoverishing them with the ultimate goal of totally controlling them and conditioning them to assume national “guilt” (debt) for fictional circumstances — while federal block grants to states sit in the the state-level bank accounts associated with state-level government leadership until they figure out even more creative ways to redistribute AWAY from poor people and TOWARDS the professional class who believes they should make a living managing poor people?

I mean, the key concept behind “TANF” (block grants to the states) was for the FEDS to give the STATES more flexibility with the billions of aid they got from the federal government on this logic (?):  The federal government will   “take it on faith” that the top state leadership (all 50, and territories) had their own citizens and residents best interests in mind, and not special interests, like quid pro quo deals?

FAQs on CAFRs, and more.  Courtesy Walter Burien, C.A. Fitts (Their Work,My Flavoring)(Basic Macro Concepts, highly Recommended Reading.  Synthesize Common Sense…)  links at the bottom of this post show that Family Courts are part of Government, which is a business.  One leads to a chart of the 112th (previous) Congress, by Religion, which (given what I now know about the courts) the following commentary:

In both House of Reps and Senate, a solid majority (88%, 75% or so, respectively.) are held by people that routinely say and hear the word “Jesus Christ” in worship, and are certain that, whether Mormon (small), Protestant (largest block), or Catholic (Smaller block but largest single denomination) — the other guys got it wrong, seriously wrong.  

Perhaps the off-the-record debate among the faithful and praying contingency (Protestant and Catholic, or within the “real” protestants and those Sects who supposedly aren’t really “Christian,” like Mormons, went something like this:  “Since we can’t agree on theology, can we agree on a common enemy?  Women,* or maybe Poverty.  Or Child abuse.  Or — wait a minute, let me think — OK, “GOT IT!– we can wrap all three up in one” — “fatherlessness.”    I also learned that of the Protestant block (for 113th, at least), the largest sector is Baptist.

(*especially women making up false allegations that someone was abusing them, and taking legal action on it, reporting  to OUTsiders…  Or women with dark skin out-breeding “US” (for “Us” — see recent photos of any full Congress and make a wild guess who that might represent).

There is a WHOLE lot more that could be said about both those topics. However, after a few days of attempting to say it (and fighting this formatting), I admitted defeat and am settling (for how) in just getting those two links up there.

Fascinating stuff, and all of it is going to lead to more material. Like, today, I just got another look at a group called the “National Governors’ Conference” which has, within it, something called the National Governors’ Conference Center for Best Practices (or something very similar). The latter is a nonprofit 501(c)3 which was NOT formed in ca. 1908, like the governors conference — but shares a website, a street address, and leases employees from the NGA itself.

Anyhow, Governor Frank Keating (of the first link, above: Excess Welfare Funds) is being portrayed as having “on the issues” endorsed the “NGA” statement on fatherhood.

Which brings up the point — if we’re such a representative form of government, why is policy being set at the national level with the “help” of nonprofits with multi-million-dollar budget and whose board members consist of all 50 governors and the leadership of 5 US Territories?

Not to mention, that although there have been 36 US Governors who were women — no woman chaired this NGA until Janet Napolitano of Arizona, and that in 2006. So small wonder it’s all enthusiastic about the fatherhood promotion!

That, and the fact that the fatherhood promotion is simply setting up systems-change programs at all governmental levels, hardly the most transparent setup.

Anyhow, those two links, especially the top one, are quite informative.

I may bring this up again, with the follow-up. it has to do with, simply, the nature of our country and dates back to at least 1934 — and the Social Security Act, plus, before then, the issues of public housing (HUD and HHS programs are absolutely related).

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

July 8, 2013 at 9:29 pm

One Response

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. RE: If it’s been helpful to you, hit me with a comment or a legitimate (not harassing) question that doesn’t sound like spam. I am looking for people able to understand AND explain this material to others, and who want to act on it. I am looking a few good men and women who will stand on the fence — and know when orders to haze (or abuse) others, or ignore neighbors hazing others — don’t have to be obeyed.

    I am from MN and have attempted to educate others regarding your information as well as the invaluable research you provided on Dakota County.

    Please contact me at your convenience to discuss this further.

    Thank you,

    Dede Evavold

    Dede is not responsible for anything BELOW this line, which I am adding 2/24/2015, finally noticing and approving the above comment (I think I didn’t approve initially because there was a tel#).

    [we have been in touch, but I don’t believe it was meant to post a tel#]. I forgot to approve comment. I have sidebar links dealing with Minnesota. a critical state in many matters on which I report here, but certain organizations are strategically placed in different states to exert influence (on state laws, for example) through a variety of means. If anyone expects, however, to understand domestic violence INDUSTRY and connections, they should check out duluthmodel.org, learn about the Wellstones (pre-2002, obviously) and their AFCC involvement (see about 2000 or 2001 AFCC newsletters), there is I believe a Children’s Law Clinic, there’s the IDVAADC (father’s rights blended with domestic violence) at University of Minnesota, and then there’s the AFCC outpost (my term) at William Mitchell College of Law, and the IDVAAC. Some of those links:

    http://www.theduluthmodel.org/. The co-founder (with Ellen Pence) of this group is said to be Mn Rep. Michael Paymar, who was recently found accepting special NWO honors from an organization (foundation, actually) based in Hamburg, Germany and with a membership (IF I recall it right) of 50 Councillors who were, at least a token few of them, actually Americans (meaning, in the oh-so-arrogant way, US Citizens). Going for the “global” but 96% of this “Systems Change” outfit selling intervention programs of specific kinds (that just so happen to be federally funded) was about 96%. Small in size, large in vision, and probably causing certain kinds of trouble to domestic violence survivors wondering “what happened?!?!##@?” in family law courts all over the country. Never fear, “Family Court Enhancement Project” is here, and BWJP (http://www.bwjp.org/) just got its very own corporate identity, in Minnesota, not long ago, after years of being the prime project on page two of DAIP tax returns, while collaborating under its own name to present to AFCC.
    http://web.wmitchell.edu/biography/nancy-versteegh/ … compare to Maurice A. Deane School of Law, Hofstra University of New York (this is the editorial board of the Family Court Review, co-published by AFCC and said law school. Now you know how this is done. Bookmark and memorize membership (advised): http://law.hofstra.edu/Academics/experientiallearning/journals/familycourtreview/editorialboard/index.html

    Here’s MN Business search page (top left link):
    Did you know that “National Council on Family Relations” (been around a LONG time and has a background in sociology one step (if that) away from eugenics (See David Popenoe, Paul Popenoe) — has a MN mailing address, but is an Illinois Corporation, and only registered in Minnesota about 2010? President is Paul R. Amato, who may be known to some as associated (Advisory Board?) on the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative, which I’ve blogged on and people should know more about, in general. It’s your TANF funds, why not start sometime? (They started around 1999 and are still going strong. Federal grants DO help with that, especially when they are put into PR, and the religious component help with the pre-fab welfare roles for a distribution network. And, please forgive me for raining this fast paragraph on a comment well over a year old. It’s one way of getting a lot of information out fast (the “string-it-together” method)…///Blog Author, Let’s Get Honest.

    Dede Evavold

    September 17, 2013 at 5:49 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: