lumigan tramadol tadalafil

New Column: Taron James Ruling an Example of Child Support Enforcement Victimizing Military Personnel, Innocent Citizens

2007-06-27
By

My new co-authored column, Servicemen victimized by child support system (World Net Daily, 6/27/07), discusses the recent Taron James ruling and the ways the child support enforcement system victimizes innocent citizens, particularly military personnel. Family law attorney Jeff Leving and I wrote:

“One of the reasons child support enforcement agencies are able to abuse citizens with impunity is the widespread myth that they collect $4 for every dollar they spend. The mainstream media…has failed to point out this obvious Enron-style accounting. Over $20 billion in child support is collected nationwide yearly, and only $5 billion is spent on enforcement. However, the vast majority of the $20 billion isn’t collected – it’s received. These are simply the payments already being made by law-abiding fathers, and will continue regardless of the cuts. The $4 myth was created by incorrectly counterposing total collections with expenditures on enforcement. Research shows that child support enforcement funds are often frittered away in misguided attempts to collect artificially inflated paper arrearages from low-income men who couldn’t possibly pay them.

“In 1998, Congress held extensive hearings on the myriad abuses committed by the Internal Revenue Service against law-abiding citizens. What few realize is that there are a similar number of men, fathers and families who have been victims of the same types of abuses by child support enforcement agencies. Because federal funding helps shape the way child support enforcement bureaucracies operate, similar hearings are needed to investigate and remedy these abuses.”

Read the column here. To write a Letter to the Editor of World Net Daily, click here.

To learn more about the Taron James case, click here. Los Angeles attorney Marc Angelucci represented Taron James and Taron was eventually able to get his child support order set aside under AB 252, the California Paternity Fraud bill.

California is one of the few states to have meaningfully addressed the military reservists/child support issue mentioned above. In 2005, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed SB 1082, which helps resolve the child support nightmare many mobilized reservists face.  The bill was shepherded through the legislature by Michael Robinson and the California Alliance for Families and Children, and many of you wrote letters and made phone calls in support of the bill. To learn more, click here. 

Expose False Allegations with Technology
If you could be falsely accused by an angry woman, use technology to expose the real aggressor.
www.DontMakeHerMad.com
7 views
Didn't make Oprah's Book Club. And Ronnie doesn't care. Man up. Buy the book now on Amazon.com. Or listen to Ronnie tell a story at escaping-from-reality.com.


  • mruffolo

    Lawyer jailed for failing to pay child support

    [Michael Cox, 43], who represented himself, told Southampton Magistrates’ Court: “I have been referred to as an absent father, but that’s not what I am. I’m a father who well knows the obligation to his children and I discharge that obligation. I feed all of my children, I clothe them, I house them – that’s what I spend my money on. The Child Support Agency gives me no assistance for that and requires me to spend the money twice.

    “I say that makes it oppressive, unjust and discriminatory in its action. In this case you have two established families living in equilibrium.

    http://www.clickdocs.co.uk/news/view.asp?ID=434

  • http://www.antipeonage.0catch.com Roger Knight

    The real solution is scream for the enforcement of the Peonage Law.

    Everything else is useless, in that while it may bring some relief for a lucky few, it does not solve the problem.

    Whereas screaming for the enforcement of the Peonage Law will work, IF ENOUGH OF US DO IT!

    It seems that whenever a problem has an obvious solution, we have to wait until everything else is tried first.

  • gudenuff

    mruffolo that’s the catch. Yeah you have a right to petition the court for a reduction BUT in most cases that request is ALWAYS denied. Don’t forget imputed income! The law should be: Any time you lose your job or have a reduction in salary AUTOMATICALLY there is a reduction……without going to court.

    Gudenuff

  • gudenuff

    mruffolo that’s the catch. Yeah you have a right to petition the court for a reduction BUT in most cases that request is ALWAYS denied. Don’t forget imputed income! Teh law should be any time you lose your job or have a reduction in salary AUTOMATICALLY there is a reduction……without going to court.

    Gudenuff

  • mruffolo

    Most divorced dads are unaware that they can petition the court to temporarily modify support payment when they lose a job or their monthly income decreases.

    The state and county does not instruct fathers to do this. Instead the government instruct them to get a lawyer. At up to $3,000 for a lawyer’s retainer, few men make the correct decision to go to court. Many men may not understand Pro Se.

    I suspect that most of the child support overdue is not 20% of his net income.

    This affect is compounded when you combine it with unsound account practices by the county and the federal incentives the state and county receives.

    When a divorced dad serves in the armed forces his problem is compounded by proximity.







Right.

Man up.

Buy the book now on Amazon.com. Or listen to Ronnie tell a story at escaping-from-reality.com.

Search