Lary Holland: Official Blog, Links, and Resources

A Trout Creek woman who allegedly stole $52,623 from the Delaware
County Department of Social Services Child Support Unit was fired from
her position in January, DSS Commissioner William Moon said Friday.

The story doesn't end with this Trout Creek woman stealing the money. Who is going to pay back the children and the taxpayers? Inadequate supervision is what we have been saying all the long. Again, what is Congress doing to tie up the State's lack of professionalism in operating programs where they claim to be helping needy families, while stealing the money out from underneath them. This particular investigation took over 4 years to detect the outright theft.

State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli released an audit Friday
indicating that the Delaware County Child Support Collection Unit lost
$52,623 from 2003 to 2007.

The audit, requested by Northrup, also found that there was
inadequate supervision of personnel responsible for collecting and
depositing child support funds.

Taxpayers are currently footing the bill, largely for their
government to collect and process child support payments for middle and
upper class families. Actual needy families appear to be the minority
of collections through the Federal Title IV-D program.

Again, we need Congress to install more accountability into the Title IV-D program or add eligibility requirements to shrink down the size of these programs so that State Directors can better control their own employees. Don't be fooled by the best interest joke, that involves high paid government officials lining their own pockets at the expense of family and parent/child relationships.

Robert Pedersen is highlighted in this FRONT PAGE article covering the Equal Parenting Bike Trek and Equal Parenting in the State of Michigan. Read below the picture for links to participate in the discussion and to see one of the comments that I have left. Robert Pedersen also made a brief appearance on Sunday Night's Get Off The Bench which you can listen to by pressing play on the player below.

Robert Pedersen plans to ride his bike from Lansing to Washington D.C. with five other supporters of Equal Parenting. View more about Mr. Pedersen at www.daddyblogger.com

The Court has no clothes, and are completely exposed in this article and with the numerous commenters that have already participated. Don't be left out.

My comment: Equal is as Equal Does

I am a producer and host of an online talk show called "Get Off The
Bench" where we have men and women join in and tell us what they
experience in the family court system. Although it is a national show,
with participants spanning every state in the United States, we have a
great deal of participation from Michigan. When I read this article I
was thankful of Michigan largest newspaper covering the single most
important topic that is affecting our economy, our communities, and our
government.

"They have always had more time and money to lobby lawmakers, while
mothers tend to devote their time to raising the children, she said."

The above is factually untrue. It shows time and time again that one
of the key reasons that a single-parent fights is over control and
money, not the best interests of the children. (The type of conflict
caused by an adversarial system promotes the same conflict that likely
resulted in the separation of the parents.) Somehow policy got skewed
where the best interests of a single-parent is the best interests of
the child. The adverse is the truth, single-parent households are the
WORST for children.

Of all of the child abuse and neglect to occur against a child it is
first by a biological Mom's live-in male roommate and seconded by the
biological mom. Removing Dads or excluding Dads not only removes the
primary protector of the children from their lives, but also
unfortunately excludes all of the secondary protectors, including
grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins.

Michigan ranks last in undistributed collected child support money,
so Michigan enjoys the current high-conflict legal system that pits
parent against parent. In fact, 56 Million Dollars were collected by
Michigan and not distributed. According to law, if they get away with
it for 1-year, Michigan keeps the money. On the other hand, Michigan
claims to have distributed just over 30 Million to actual needy
families. This is a horrible track record for our State.

Children should never be a source of income for our State or
conflicting parents. It produces incentive to fight instead of get
along. We have a situation now to correct many of the problems with the
family law system and it begins by reinstating the value of both
parents not undermine it. We will see our economy, communities, and
government prosper from only dabbling in cases that meet a threshold of
interference. It has been proven time and time again that government
was never meant to handle everything, only certain things. Let fit,
willing, and caring parents equally enjoy their children and focus on
those families that truly need help.

Society has done a wonderful job at claiming that "child support" is a special kind of "debt." Society has also done a wonderful job in convincing the public that people sentenced for owing debt to prisons nationwide is a good thing. Where is the societal value in placing a 51-year old man in PRISON for years on a debt that is likely going to cause a significant recitivism rate, especially since once this man gets out his employment is likely going to be minimum wage work? Who is really penalized by this? The taxpayers are penalized more than anyone, as well as this man's children.

The child support enforcement program was intended to pay back the federal government for welfare payments they were making to the States to operate their social welfare programs. What is odd, is that the program has morphed into a cumbersome and bloated bureucratic machine that doesn't benefit society, only those that are directly employed by the system. If anything, the programs are encouraging more out of wedlock births, more fights over money, and more dissolutions of marriage because it is now financially beneficial to separate. The government is simply glorifying the bad behaviors of society while punishing the tax payer. Read the below article and tell me where the value to society is.

Man to serve time for back child support

From Wire Reports

A 51-year-old Kosciusko man was sentenced to 10 years in prison with eight suspended and ordered to pay $68,215.87 in back child support. [This man will likely no longer be as marketable when he gets out of prison, therefore reducing his earnings potential and contribution to society dramatically.]

Dennis Kern was sentenced Wednesday, April 30, by Oktibbeha County Circuit Court Judge Lee Howard on charges of refusing to provide for the support and maintenance of his children.

The case was prosecuted by Mississippi's attorney general. [This AG should have been focusing on serious crimes.]

The court ordered Kern to start paying the owed child support payments 60 days after his release from prison. [Unlikely because most employers will not want ex-cons working for them.]

He will be on supervised probation once he's out. [More Fees for the System]

You will find yourself asking the questions too. Why is the federal government so involved in child support enforcement when the collections associated with Current Assistance Cases total less than one half of what the States are collectively spending on their own contribution to the program? It is definitely time to reign in free for all welfare spending by our federal government.

Over participation continues to be a major problem in the nation’s child support enforcement program. I have highlighted important sections regarding participation numbers, collections, and undistributed child support. Net Undistributed Collections appears to make up the equivalent of about 50% of the total collections of means tested needy families. These are nationwide numbers. You will see that between former and never assistance, actual needy families are a super minority of this social welfare program.

Adding eligibility requirements into the nation’s Title IV-D/Child Support Enforcement Program will benefit needy families and will also constitute a significant savings to the taxpayers at both the federal and state levels. Removing affluent feuding families from the program will also benefit children of those divorce and child custody cases, by emphasizing on the parent-child relationship rather than encouraging bickering and fighting over who is going to receive a check and for how much.

Actual Federal Expenditures Nationwide: $5,593,864,242.00 (Billions)

Estimated State Expenditures Nationwide: $1,845,975,199.86 (Billions)

Taxpayer Expense, not including other social programs and costs of incarcerations is over $7 BILLION!

ACTUAL COLLECTIONS FOR MEANS TESTED NEEDY FAMILIES: $946,283,222.00 (Millions)

(please note there is no verification to determine if the money was distributed after collection.)

This program would be better off distributing money out of the budget directly to needy families and just get rid of the employees behind the Child Support Enforcement Agency. With Net Undistributed Collections totaling nearly 50% of the amount collected for needy families, one has to wonder how many needy families are indeed being helped by the program. There appears to be no need for federal government involvement, since the amount distributed to needy families is about HALF of what the states are spending to keep their portion of the program going.