Royally Kranked

Tuesday, May 02, 2006

Doing Right For The Least Among US

Just why is the GOP so hellbent on screwing over those with the least amount of political pull, and all in the name of faith & family values?

Maybe that's because the poor, the sick, the elderly, the medically uninsured and the homeless don't make big campaign contributions

And maybe that's why I so enjoy seeing these lice, these political parasites get the bitchslappings they so richly deserve, and if the state of Missouri is really stupid enough to appeal this case, then it should make quite the millstone to throw around Gov Blunt's political neck

bypass registration with this Bug Me Not link

Judge Bars Subsidy Cuts in Adopting Foster Children

A federal judge in Missouri yesterday blocked a state law that cut aid to parents adopting foster children, ruling that it violated federal statutes and the Constitution's equal protection clause.

The case had been watched by children's advocates nationally, who said the law, which passed last year as part of a broader effort to curb social spending, was a dangerous precedent that would undercut the adoption prospects of troubled children.

"We hope that this decision will stem efforts around the country to find inventive ways to cut budgets while harming voiceless populations," said Ira P. Lustbader, a lawyer with Children's Rights, a group in New York that joined in the case with local advocates and parents' groups. "This law made no sense as a legal matter, as a policy matter or as an economic matter."

Damn straight, there's just not much of a better definition of "Heartless, Corrupt Scumbags" than those who pick on powerless kids in order to appeal to those practicing a perverted "faith-based" agenda Like Blunt's doing in his quest for another political campaign

Fucking political tick, a bloodsucker that serves no purpose other than to feed & engorge itself at every possible opportunity, that's what Blunt is, that's his true nature

Gov. Matt Blunt, a Republican, had pushed the law, saying that adoption subsidies were spiraling out of control and that it made sense to focus money on the neediest parents. The governor did not issue a statement yesterday.

Tell you what Gov, when Gays can marry and adopt kids out of the Foster system, then maybe your off-key caterwauling about focusing money to "the neediest parents" might contain even a smidgen of logic or truth

This is a political trap all of your own making Bluntie boy, and in typical GOP fashion, you'll try and drag everyone else in the state down with you legally

Governor, for God's sake, be a man, not an underqualified, overpaid political lackey/operative, the change might do you some good

Hours after the ruling, by Judge Scott O. Wright of United States District Court in St. Louis, the state filed a notice of appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, a spokesman for the state attorney general's office, John Fougere, said.

And, as usual, GOP math leaves something to be desired, like any basis in fact, or any other factors to explaing-it's good for only part of the story, the least important part

The state said that such subsidies cost it $60 million a year and that the law would save it $12 million.

Critics said that by discouraging adoptions the law would end up costing the state more over time in foster expenses and in later social costs, because so many former foster children end up homeless, with drug problems or in prison.

Gee, if one were so inclined to see EVERY GOP action in a sinister light, it would be here to opine that the state is making money off those same foster kids if they end up in Missouri prisons & jails, especially with federal funding attached

Finding permanent homes for foster children who cannot return to their biological parents is a national goal, backed up by federal, state and local subsidies for adoptive parents who are often taking on children with cognitive or medical disabilities. In Missouri, such payments can range from $225 to $650 a month, depending on needs for therapy or other special care.

Oh yeah, that Blunt Blather about focusing "on the most needy parents" is kinda undercut when considering this

The law required adoptive parents to reapply for subsidies annually, voiding contracts that had guaranteed aid to age 18. For a subgroup of parents, whose children were not covered by a federal program that bars means tests, it ended aid if the parents earned more than 200 percent of the poverty line, or $38,314 a year for a family of four.

Even though we know major GOP contributors like Halliburton are allowed to loot & swindle the US Treasury at every possible opportunity, we all know how those families making under $40,000 annually game the system blind to a far greater extent than even Halliburton or Exxon could dream of on their best price-gouging days

One thing I learned the hard way from my youngest days-the ONLY way to deal with bullies is a good, swift, crack across the mouth, and in this case, Bullyboi Blunt got cracked-HARD-by the Judge

In August, Judge Wright temporarily delayed invoking the law. After a one-day trial last week, he issued a permanent injunction yesterday, saying that the annual renewal of subsidy agreements violated federal law and that the means test was discriminatory because it applied just to a subgroup without rational justification.

"The means test will not save taxpayer money, but will increase the overall cost of child welfare in the State of Missouri," he said. Several states have acted to curb adoption subsidies or eligibility, but the Missouri law went further than others by retroactively imposing means tests and other changes on parents who had adopted in the past.

Nice try Gov, sticking it to parents retroactively, nothing in the least unethical, unseemly or improper about that at all

Even better, the facts & hard numbers keep up Blunt's bitchslapping on the unmerciful end of the karmic scale

Related aid to parents has grown, reaching $4 billion last year, with half paid by the federal government, according to a study in the March issue of The Social Service Review.

The increasing costs have drawn the scrutiny of financially beleaguered states.

If a subsidy cut discourages adoptions, that is likely to prove shortsighted, said Richard P. Barth, a professor of social welfare at the University of North Carolina. Professor Barth is a co-author of the March study, which found that the public cost of supporting a child in the foster system tended to surpass significantly any adoption subsidies.

"Our research shows that adoptive parents pay quite a substantial amount for services that their children need, and this is only partly offset by the subsidies they receive," Professor Barth said. "These parents are taking on a substantial challenge and deserve the appreciation of the public."

Amen, and the last thing those parents and the kids they adopt deserve is to be the subject of sleazy & inhuman budget cuts

I'm sure this disgraced policy will play so well with the voters in the state

Since Missouri is the "Show Me State", perhaps the first to show us something is Blunt displaying a heart, spine or political courage, any of those qualities would serve him far better than picking on the least powerful in our midst


  • So, let me get this straight, and please correct me if I'm wrong. AFTER kids have been legally adopted, parents are still receiving payments from the government? Is that correct? If so, then I'm going to sound like the worst villain ever, but I have to say, that annoys the crap out of me! WAKE UP PEOPLE! Here's a newsflash for you! If you don't have the means to support them, DON'T HAVE/ADOPT CHILDREN! I'm so tired of paying for other people's selfishness! Yes, I said selfishness. Making the decision to have or adopt a child you know you cannot support on your own is SELFISH! Why else would someone chose to bring a child into a world of poverty? I'm tired of hearing, "But I always wanted to be a parent, and I have a lot of love to give". That's not thinking of the potential child, that's thinking of your own desire to fill some void in yourself. If people would think before they act, this whole problem of impoverished kids in or outside of foster care wouldn't exist. Of course, I understand there are always going to be exceptions to the rule, but for the most part this whole issue boils down to people's selfish, irresponsible, reprehensible behavior. Is that the kid's fault? Of course not. But it isn't mine, either, and I'm sick of paying for everyone else's crappy behavior.

    By Blogger KrankysSis, at 9:59 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home