What the actual fuck?!?!?!

[Boss]

Not only will that kid up come up without a father, he will have to rely solely on the deadbeat mother of his. Wonderful!

That deadbeat mother who won't be able to get any more government benefits for her bastards.

Brilliant idea!!

So just let them starve? Or sleep in the streets?
I am all for fixing this bullshit entitlement culture we have created, but my god man..

Uhm... yeah... let's see... I am going to starve or turn over the name of baby daddy? Tough choice!

 

[Boss]

So much for the myth of the "Compassionate Conservative".

Yeah, I'm not much of a compassionate conservative when it comes to deadbeat dads. Sorry!

 

[TNHarley]

Not only will that kid up come up without a father, he will have to rely solely on the deadbeat mother of his. Wonderful!

That deadbeat mother who won't be able to get any more government benefits for her bastards.

Brilliant idea!!

So just let them starve? Or sleep in the streets?
I am all for fixing this bullshit entitlement culture we have created, but my god man..

Uhm... yeah... let's see... I am going to starve or turn over the name of baby daddy? Tough choice!

Well.... you make a good point!

 

[Boss]

States don't track the employment of every person on court ordered child support. So unless the "deadbeat dad" in question, contacts the child support division where the child support is owed, they don't even know there are wages to be "garnished".

Apparently, you know as little about child support recovery as anything else. The "State" doesn't have anything to do with it. There are a number of private child support recovery agencies which work with the federal government in going after deadbeat dads through their social security numbers. This is very effective because most people work where they must report their SS number and have taxes taken out of their checks. It doesn't matter if you live in a different state or if you report to an agency or not... If you have a SS number and work, your paycheck can be garnished and child support recovered. Also, if you ever have any federal disbursement issued, that can be intercepted and used toward back child support.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Chasing that child support

It is the Communist tool for the destruction of the nuclear family.

 

[Boss]

It's a stupid plan. What if a woman is raped by a stranger and doesn't have an abortion? What if a woman is drugged at a party? Hell, what if the baby is abandoned or put for adoption at birth? This is the kind of bullshit that deserves to be called out. It is way to easy for a guy to duck liability in the USA for what they did. The only way this works is if you let the government track DNA for every single person living in the USA across the whole USA.

Anyone up for that?

No, it's not necessary. Your little caveats and exceptions can be dealt with, that's not a problem. You're absolutely right, it's way too easy for deadbeat dads to shirk their responsibility and something has to be done about that. I asked Cybernoggin a couple of times and he never replied... what's YOUR solution?

What I am hearing is a total left-wing resistance to ANYTHING being done to fix the problem. It's as if you want everything to remain the same. I thought you people were "progressives" and didn't like the status quot?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Let's punish the child too!

 

[Dr.Traveler]

It's a stupid plan. What if a woman is raped by a stranger and doesn't have an abortion? What if a woman is drugged at a party? Hell, what if the baby is abandoned or put for adoption at birth? This is the kind of bullshit that deserves to be called out. It is way to easy for a guy to duck liability in the USA for what they did. The only way this works is if you let the government track DNA for every single person living in the USA across the whole USA.

Anyone up for that?

No, it's not necessary. Your little caveats and exceptions can be dealt with, that's not a problem. You're absolutely right, it's way too easy for deadbeat dads to shirk their responsibility and something has to be done about that. I asked Cybernoggin a couple of times and he never replied... what's YOUR solution?

What I am hearing is a total left-wing resistance to ANYTHING being done to fix the problem. It's as if you want everything to remain the same. I thought you people were "progressives" and didn't like the status quot?

I'm inherently suspicious of any system that immediately puts the blame and pressure on a new mom and baby. Postpartum, maternity, etc, really screw up a woman's mental state and mental capabilities. On top of that, for this to work the court has to be willing to outright require a man to submit his DNA whenever he is accused of being the father. That's going to be hard to do considering that no law has been broken in the case of consensual sex. This really smacks of the start of a national DNA database as the only realistic way to enforce this.

Let's also add in here that the folks supporting this bill here in this thread have been openly resistant to sex ed and birth control. You know what would be better for me, as a taxpayer, than this litigation filled mess? Giving people free birth control. It'd be cheaper than the legal fees this would rack up and be a LOT cheaper than a lifetime of welfare support.

 

[Czernobog]

So much for the myth of the "Compassionate Conservative".

Yeah, I'm not much of a compassionate conservative when it comes to deadbeat dads. Sorry!

Not when it comes to innocent children, either, it would appear.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

 

[The Professor]

So let's get this straight... you would rather have a system where deadbeat fathers have no accountability and there is no way for the legal apparatus to hold them accountable for their children? Everything is fine with you as long as shitheels can shirk their responsibilities and carry on like oversexed baboons, leaving the women to struggle with the burden of the children?

Obviously, the purpose here is not to decree the child out of existence. It is to hold fathers equally accountable for the children they help produce. And I have some news for you, jackass... state lines do not protect deadbeat fathers in any way shape of form. You owe your child support regardless of where you live and if you are working with a social security number anywhere in the US, your tax returns can be intercepted and your wages garnished. It is certainly NOT cost prohibitive and it happens all the time.

Whether that was the purpose, or not, by refusing to issue a birth certificate, that is the effect of the proposal. I get the whole, "We're pissed about deadbeat dads" thing, but this is a preposterous attempt at dealing with it! And your federal taxes only get garnished when you reach a certain amount. Your state taxes don't get touched for child support in other states. The amount you must be behind before it becomes a federal issue is $10,000. Do you know how far one typically needs to be to be behind $10,000? I, at one time, because I was unemployed for a long time, was behind over 5 years, and the total wasn't even $3,000. And wage garnishment is not proactive. States don't track the employment of every person on court ordered child support. So unless the "deadbeat dad" in question, contacts the child support division where the child support is owed, they don't even know there are wages to be "garnished".

I think you are mistaken about the amount which trigger federal tax refund offsets (confiscation of all or part of a federal refund) for nonpayment of child support.

“Cases eligible for tax refund offset are those cases that have a delinquent child support debt. If the child support order includes an award for spousal support, the tax refund may also cover the past-due spousal support. For a case receiving Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), the noncustodial parent must owe at least $150; in a non-TANF case, the amount owed must be at least $500.

Federal Tax Refund Offset Program | Office of Child Support Enforcement | Administration for Children and Families

Further, “an individual who owes delinquent child support in an amount exceeding $5,000 may be certified by OCSE to the Secretary of State. Upon receiving such a certification, the Secretary of State shall refuse to issue a U.S. passport to such an individual, or may revoke, restrict or limit a passport previously issued to such an individual.”

Collection of Child Support through Federal Income Tax Refund Offset, Administrative Offset, and Passport Denial | Office of Child Support Enforcement | Administration for Children and Families

In addition , Sates have their own programs for taking State tax refunds from the non-custodial parent and applying the funds towards child support arrears. The first link below involves the State of Wisconsin, where there is no minimum limit to trigger refund offsets, and the second link applies to New Jersey where the amount must be only $150 when the person receiving child support is on Welfare and $500 if the recipient is not.

Intercepting tax refunds

New Jersey Child Support | NJ Child Support | Tax refund offset

It gets even worse. States have the power to require the employer of the noncustodial parent to withhold wages to pay child support obligations. One example is the State of Massachusetts:

“All child support orders entered in Massachusetts must include a provision for immediate income withholding unless the court suspends the withholding. If the parent who pays support has a regular source of income, then the income withholding order requires child support to be deducted from the income. Deducting child support from an employee's paycheck is similar to deducting tax payments. When DOR is notified of a new child support order, it issues an "Order/Notice of Order to Withhold Income for Child Support" (a form mandated by federal law). The link above shows an example of the form.”

“The limit of child support deducted depends on certain circumstances. Pursuant to the Consumer Credit Protection Act (CCPA), you cannot deduct more than 60% of an employee's disposable earnings (50% if the employee is supporting a spouse or other children in his or her household). If, however, an employee is 12 or more weeks behind in child support payments, the limits increase to 65% and 55% respectively.”

Income Withholding FAQs

Finally, in my home state of Florida and at least a few other states, those who are delinquent in child support may have their drivers licenses suspended. The following link reveals the different ways the State can enforce payment of child support including drivers license revocation:

FL Dept Rev - Enforcement of Child Support Orders

Bottom line: Nonpayment of child support is a damn serious things and there are multiple ways to force compliance. I think everyone already knows that failure to pay child support can land you in jail for contempt of court.

I have no sympathy whatsoever for those who do not support their children as required by law.

 

[Boss]

Let's punish the child too!

Well no one wants the child punished so I think what we'd probably do is take the child from a non-compliant mother to be raised by responsible people. The child is who is being considered in this legislation... their future and well-being. Let's be clear-- YOUR position is to keep things as they are so that deadbeat dads can continue to shirk their responsibilities and the burden is shoved onto the mother and society.

Still not seeing a thing from any of you on how to deal with this problem.

 

[Boss]

I'm inherently suspicious of any system that immediately puts the blame and pressure on a new mom and baby. Postpartum, maternity, etc, really screw up a woman's mental state and mental capabilities. On top of that, for this to work the court has to be willing to outright require a man to submit his DNA whenever he is accused of being the father. That's going to be hard to do considering that no law has been broken in the case of consensual sex. This really smacks of the start of a national DNA database as the only realistic way to enforce this.

Let's also add in here that the folks supporting this bill here in this thread have been openly resistant to sex ed and birth control. You know what would be better for me, as a taxpayer, than this litigation filled mess? Giving people free birth control. It'd be cheaper than the legal fees this would rack up and be a LOT cheaper than a lifetime of welfare support.

Well I disagree. I'm not paying for birth control and I won't ask other tax payers to pay for birth control. I don't have a problem with teaching juveniles sex ed, as long as we teach abstinence is the only 100% effective form of birth control.

There is no blame being put on anyone. This is a measure to bring fathers of illegitimate children into compliance with their responsibility. My understanding is, he would only have to submit his DNA if he denies he is the father. No need for a database, this is an isolated problem that involves less than 5% of the population. Most men do the right thing and support their offspring.

While no law is being broken with regard to consensual sex, child support laws are being avoided through a loophole... and that's why we need a new law. I don't see where there are any extraordinary legal fees involved here. You'll either comply with the new law or lose benefits and possibly your child.

 

[Boss]

Not when it comes to innocent children, either, it would appear.

What is YOUR plan for the innocent children?

 

[Dr.Traveler]

I'm inherently suspicious of any system that immediately puts the blame and pressure on a new mom and baby. Postpartum, maternity, etc, really screw up a woman's mental state and mental capabilities. On top of that, for this to work the court has to be willing to outright require a man to submit his DNA whenever he is accused of being the father. That's going to be hard to do considering that no law has been broken in the case of consensual sex. This really smacks of the start of a national DNA database as the only realistic way to enforce this.

Let's also add in here that the folks supporting this bill here in this thread have been openly resistant to sex ed and birth control. You know what would be better for me, as a taxpayer, than this litigation filled mess? Giving people free birth control. It'd be cheaper than the legal fees this would rack up and be a LOT cheaper than a lifetime of welfare support.

Well I disagree. I'm not paying for birth control and I won't ask other tax payers to pay for birth control. I don't have a problem with teaching juveniles sex ed, as long as we teach abstinence is the only 100% effective form of birth control.

There is no blame being put on anyone. This is a measure to bring fathers of illegitimate children into compliance with their responsibility. My understanding is, he would only have to submit his DNA if he denies he is the father. No need for a database, this is an isolated problem that involves less than 5% of the population. Most men do the right thing and support their offspring.

While no law is being broken with regard to consensual sex, child support laws are being avoided through a loophole... and that's why we need a new law. I don't see where there are any extraordinary legal fees involved here. You'll either comply with the new law or lose benefits and possibly your child.

I disagree. I expect men to lawyer up as soon as they're named and that's when the legal fees come in. And the database will certainly be the next step. It won't take long for folks to realize that if you had the database in place, you only need to test once and keep the results.

And again, I'm not against cracking down on deadbeat Dad's. I'd much rather put them on the hook than see them escape. But cutting off benefits with a pretty harsh timeline and potentially lifelong consequences for the child? That's a very very extreme solution to put on a new mother who is dealing with God knows what else.

 

[12icer]

I say lets take all of the welfare checks, and use old school buildings and public buildings to house the children, and let the irresponsible adults starve or do what's right, If they are off the dole, and want to live and take care of the kids THEN let them. This type of bill will start the tide in the right direction, and if followed by a stable environment bill could end 50 years of destruction for our children. This thread like so many I have seen here is based on a fantasy assumption of a unidirectional mental outlook, and completely ignoring the FACTS that are the basis of so many possible - probable outcomes. Unfortunate and sad for someone to be locked into a monoplanic existence of hatred and irrational fantasy.

 

[Boss]

I disagree. I expect men to lawyer up as soon as they're named and that's when the legal fees come in. And the database will certainly be the next step. It won't take long for folks to realize that if you had the database in place, you only need to test once and keep the results.

And again, I'm not against cracking down on deadbeat Dad's. I'd much rather put them on the hook than see them escape. But cutting off benefits with a pretty harsh timeline and potentially lifelong consequences for the child? That's a very very extreme solution to put on a new mother who is dealing with God knows what else.

Usually, those who sue the government don't get anywhere. The government retains lawyers already, there is no extra expense. Again, there is no need for a database. This is a small isolated problem that only involves a relatively small number of individuals. There would certainly be constitutional issues with a database, so that idea is DOA already. Put it out of your head because it's total nonsense.

And again, it's not going to mean any detrimental consequence for the child that they don't already face. I don't care what the mother is dealing with, her child comes first. If she doesn't care about the child, we can find suitable parents who would. I would wager that most of these moms would be forthcoming with naming a father if it meant losing benefits.

If you're not against cracking down on deadbeat dads, what is your proposal to deal with this problem? I'm not seeing any better alternative recommended and I'm all ears... present something that would do the trick and we'll discuss it. In my opinion, this is precisely the type of proactive steps we should be taking... cut the benefits off if they can't name the baby-daddy.

 

[Old Rocks]

That is true. The way they get around it is to work under the table.

That's fine... they're sacrificing their social security or any future claim for disability, or any other government benefits, tax refunds and any disbursement of equity handled by the government.

So, your solution is to punish the child. Damn, you people just get lower and lower every day.

 

[Boss]

So, your solution is to punish the child. Damn, you people just get lower and lower every day.

Well, I've gone over this at least a half dozen times in this thread and dummies like you just don't seem to be comprehending.... there is no punishment to the child. This is all about helping the child. You're the lowlife who doesn't want to change a thing... just leave the deadbeat dads alone and let them keep spawning welfare mouths for us to feed.

Now let's go through this slowly... illegitimate welfare children don't receive benefits... their mothers do. In order for them to get the benefits for said child, they must submit the child's birth certificate. This legislation makes it a requirement for them to name the father in order to get the birth certificate which they need in order to obtain the benefits.

So what happens if they don't provide the information? Well, they don't get the birth certificate or the benefits. This presents even more of a dilemma for them because they are now negligent parents who are not adequately providing for their children and the children can be taken away and put into foster care, which is probably for the best anyway.

In no circumstance are the children going to suffer. The unfit mothers will suffer... the deadbeat dads will suffer... but that's fine with me, they need to suffer. We've got to do something about this system that allows men to escape their responsibilities and lay the onus on society to pay for. That shit has to stop.

 

[whitehall]

Vulgar under educated lefties refer to important political issues and complicated aspects of government as "the fuck". You almost gotta laugh.

 

[yiostheoy]

Ignore list -- for not knowing how to create an intelligent title to a thread.