Enemies
State government: Lists of State and County Employees are available at www.lbloom.net
See also the new Support Enforcement Justice Files at www.antipeonage.0catch.com. Home addresses and other information.
Some practical advice for support contemnors in the State of Washington
A Way to Walk a Mile in a Noncustodial Parent's Moccasins.
I am not going to fool around with this: I will say it loud and say it proud:
These people are CRIMINALS! They willfully and deliberately violate 18 U.S.C. 1581 whenever they impose or enforce a support order that can only be complied with by labor. They will use the threat or fact of contempt proceedings, arrest and imprisonment, and lately license suspension, to coerce our fellow citizens, AMERICANS, to obtain employment to pay these debts or obligations, often defined in amounts that are unreasonable, and well in excess of what the custodial parent needs to adequately support the child, or even on behalf of those custodial parents who do not even NEED to receive the money to adequately care for their children. That is PEONAGE, pure and simple.
Let them try to sue me for libel, slander, calumny, or defamation, I'll defend on TRUTH!! Let a jury decide.
The following links are to those who are our enemies, criminals, as above explained.
The city police currently listed at www.justicefiles.org are usually not the ones who arrest noncustodial parents with the intent to return them to a condition of peonage. In Seattle, that task falls primarily on the "Civil Unit" of the King County Sheriff's Department, headed by Sheriff Dave Reichert, who has publicly proclaimed his policy of enforcing the system of peonage called child support. The contempt actions are brought by the Family Support Division of the King County Prosecutor, who is Norm Maleng. The contempt actions are enforced by the King County Superior Court's Family Court Commissioners, including Bonnie Canada-Thurston and Hollis Holman.
Just as Nazi Germany enlisted its entire government apparatus in enforcing its special laws concerning Jews, including the Final Solution, our nation has similarly enlisted most of our government apparatus into violating 18 U.S.C. §1581. I just list their own websites! Because of the enormous number of such official websites, I have to break it down by state, by the federal government, and by those ever popular non-government organizations who lobby for support enforcement.
United States Federal Government
Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California
Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia
Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana
Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland
Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri
Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey
New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota
Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico
Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee
Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington
West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming
If these links are dead, or are incomplete, it is because this is a big project! I will add to these pages as I have time. Feel free to e-mail me at [email protected] with any information that you have to share.
In recently updating the above linked web pages, I researched the web pages for the local county attorneys. I noticed something truly AMAZING! In some of the western states, the elected county prosecutors are washing their hands of responsibility for enforcing support orders with contempt proceedings!
In California, Idaho, Montana, and Arizona, we see child support enforcement responsibilities moving away from the elected county prosecutors and toward the state governments. For one possible explanation, see the Idaho Enemies page. To further build on that explanation, perhaps the public is not as enthusiastic about cracking down on noncustodial parents as it used to be, if it ever was. As President Bush's base of support is in the very rural counties that seem to or are abandoning the enforcement of support as a responsibility, perhaps he should rethink his support for this insane system in light of his oath to uphold the Constitution and laws of the United States. The Antipeonage Act is a law of the United States.
If the enforcement of child support is indeed as popular with the public as we are lead to believe, then every elected public official would be proclaiming enthusiastic support for it. The California District Attorneys would have loudly opposed transferring the control and responsibility over their Family Support Sections to the state government. They did not. The elected county prosecutors in Idaho, Utah, Montana, and Arizona would loudly proclaim on their web sites their enthusiastic efforts to enforce the support obligation. They do not. While many of the county prosecutors in Washington, Oregon, and Hawaii loudly proclaim their enthusiastic enforcement of support, prominently listing child support as a responsibility on their web sites, some of the more rural county prosecutors in these states do not.
It is like with the Metric System. If it was universally popular with the public, the road signs would change and the elected officials would fall over themselves taking credit. It is not, and the road signs, at least in the United States, do not change. Elected school board members go silent when asked about the track meets and the math curriculum. When local elected public officials wash their hands of something, it is because it is not popular with the public upon whom they depend for re-election.
There is hope for us, folks!
All of these agencies use the words "family" and "child" and "children" in them. There is a classic debate and propaganda trick at work here. Other examples of this trick are: If you object to affirmative action or forced busing, you are a "racist". If you believe global warming is a pile of junk science being used to establish more government control over your life, you don't care about the environment. If you believe that we should drill for petroleum in Alaska to help with our energy supply, you don't care about the caribou. If you live where 100 inches of rain fall each year and oppose the federal mandate of 1.6 gallon per flush toilets, you are a water waster. If you want to keep more of your hard earned money from the taxman by means of tax cuts, you are "greedy". If you live in the backwoods and oppose the reintroduction of grizzly bears and wolves in you area because you would rather not have your children, pets, and livestock eaten by them, again, you don't care about the environment.
See what I mean.
I oppose the use of my children's legitimate needs as an excuse to destroy me financially and then impose the kind of restrictions on me once imposed by Nazi Germany on the Jews. I thus cannot have a life. I oppose the destruction of our Constitutional rights and I support the integrity of the law and the English language in which it is written. For this I am accused of "hating women", never mind how Dawn Case was treated by the Kitsap County Sheriff's Office and the Yamhill County Circuit Court. For this, I am accused of not caring about my children. People are "surprised" to learn that I spend almost every weekend with them, even though there is a King County Deputy Sheriff who lives at the end of the street where they live!! To exercise my visitation rights is to risk arrest and imprisonment! He parks his well marked patrol car there when he is home. He certainly has no complaint if www.justicefiles.org lists his home address!
By the way, the King County Recorder is a great source of information of where people currently live. You buy a house, you grant a Deed of Trust, which is recorded, along with the legal description of the parcel and the ADDRESS. You pay off the mortgage loan, you can file a Reconveyance. That is a declaration that the property is now yours, the Deed of Trust no longer in effect. Where the property is located in King County, you can download either the Adobe Acrobat file or the Microsoft .tif file. (California counties do not provide for this, you have to request a copy of each such document to be mailed.) If your county has enough of a tax base to support this kind of website, you might not have to go to its office to search its records by name.
Simple solution:
Let the breadwinning parent have custody of the children if their support is so blasted important that it justifies turning the law into a lie and our rights into privileges to be revoked. If we wish to discourage divorce, let the petitioner be the one to volunteer to pay child support. Most "deadbeat dads" are respondents. They didn't ask for this. If the respondent is truly an unfit parent, or an abuser, let there be some due process of law before depriving him or her of his or her property and liberty. That's what James Madison had in mind with the wording of the 5th Amendment. That is what them "Radical Republicans" who won the Civil War had in mind with the 14th Amendment to impose the requirement for due process upon the States. Indeed, that is what the Barons at Runnymeade had in mind with the Magna Carta.
Then we can give a tax cut to those of you who are so "greedy" that you just want to keep more of your own money! We would no longer need child support enforcement or a welfare state.
There are some bald faced lies told by the enemies listed on some of their above linked official web sites. They tell you that they are operating under a "federal mandate". That would be Title IV-D of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 651-669b. It is not and Constitutionally cannot be a mandate. What it is, is a program where Congress purchases sovereignty over issues of family law and public assistance policy from the States for a bag of federal money. Now where does the federal government gets its money? From the same place the States get their tax money, YOU!!!! But the Supreme Court found, in Blessing v. Freestone, (1997) 520 U.S. 329, 343-344, 137 L. Ed. 2d. 569, 117 S. Ct. 1353, that the States merely contract with the federal government to impose and enforce child support laws in a certain way to qualify for federal funds. Any State may choose not to participate, and not accept the federal funds, it's NOT a mandate! That is found in Printz v. United States, (1997) 521 U.S. 898, 138 L. Ed. 2d. 914, 117 S. Ct. 2365.
It is like when you are offered a job. If you turn it down, you won't get paid. But you have the Constitutional right, 13th Amendment, to turn it down. Which is precisely what I'm fighting for.
Because the States all sell their sovereignty for the federal funds, even SOUTHERN States, former Confederate States, they practice the institution that the Confederacy fought to preserve, slavery. The duty to support the children is the excuse, but slavery it is. Another lie they tell you is that if a noncustodial parent fails to pay support, you the taxpayer must make up the difference. That is not exactly true either.
NOOO!!! Really?
Say a noncustodial pays $10,000 in child support through the State program. The State agency then bills the federal government for its collection incentive under 42 U.S.C. §658a. This statute provides that the State gets incentive money by a complicated formula for every dollar it collects and remits in child support. By paying the $10,000 in child support, the noncustodial is costing YOU, the taxpayer.
What a deal!!!!
If this is instead of public assistance, then the taxpayer might be saving money. But most custodial parents receiving child support have jobs and are not on public assistance. So you dear taxpayer, are paying federal taxes for the custodial parent to have a higher standard of living at the expense of her former husband, and at the expense of our Constitution and the Rule of Law. In most welfare cases, the noncustodial father is not able to pay enough support to cover the public assistance. He is either minimum wage or near minimum wage, chased out of the regular job market by this system and into the under the table job market by the need to survive, in hiding, in prison, or dead.
You can preach morality and fundamental obligation all you want, it ain't gonna change these basic facts.
So whose children are being supported by this system? The children of government employees. At YOUR expense.
Who did you think?
If the back button does not take you there, click Home to go to the Index page of this Antipeonage Act Website, and click Allies for the Allies page. Or you can use the Antipeonage Act Site Map.