My Letter to Congress regarding Corrupt Oregon Child Support Program.

I finally took it upon myself to write my congressman, as this seems to be the last line of advice given to me by any legal professional, any friend or family member. If you can't afford a lawyer, there is no justice anymore. This is easily witnessed in my case. The result of this letter? Out of (my) two state congressman, and 2 federal congressman, I received a grand total of 1 phone call. That's right, one. And not from the intended recipient, of course not, they are much too busy these days doing god knows what in some chamber. I received a call from a junior staff member from Senator Merkley's office. He was very polite, and seemed a little dumbfounded by this long letter. He seemed genuinely empathetic to my situation, but basically advised that it gets sticky when I am basically requesting a legislative inquiry into a judicial process/law/policy. The whole separation of powers idea. He recommended I get a hold of the Attorney General or even state governor's office. He provided me a contact to ask for, of which I've yet to call.

A rather gigantic let-down, for the hard work and length of time it took to compose this letter. For what it's worth, if it didn't serve me much purpose, perhaps it will inspire someone else out their going through what I'm going through to do the same. Perhaps you will have better luck with your congressman than I. Feel free to comment below.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Congressman/Congresswoman,

My name is Matthew ****** I am a full-time employee of the Department of *******, working as a public utility specialist within the important ********* in Portland, Oregon. Also, I was active duty Air Force for 4 years, and still serve my state and country in the Oregon Air National Guard as an F-15 fighter mechanic as a drill-status guardsman every month-going on 16 years total now. Yet despite being on the payroll of not one, but two federal/state jobs…I am unable to properly feed my family, pay my utilities on time, provide for my family as any normal person should, and barely make my mortgage payment every month. Not for lack of income earned, but solely due to remaining net income allowed by what seems is the predatory mindset of the Oregon Child Support system.

I am writing you today as I feel this is my last recourse to get my voice heard, my concern brought to the attention of the legislative members of my government. It is of a matter of high importance to me for it affects my family’s well being, quality of life, and very financial survival in these hard economic times. I have attempted to first bring my concerns to the local agencies involved, and have each and every time received the obligatory ‘canned response’ from them every time. “Sorry to hear of your concerns, we’ve forwarded them to the director for feedback, your concerns will probably not be raised during our next closed-door policy-making session, if you wish- send your concerns to your legislators” is the summary responses.

While I can understand the first reaction to my concerns regarding the Oregon Child Support Program’s computation formula for determining child support will not be a popular topic for a visible public forum, because undoubtedly it will be misconstrued as arguing for ‘taking money away from the poor custodial children’; but the nuts and bolts of how the guideline/calculation actually works seems to have some very striking and unfair advantages for not only the Obligee (receiving parent for support), but the local state government as well. I feel that the children’s needs can still be met fairly, while equally allowing for the basic financial needs of the Obligor (paying parent) to support their [oftentimes other] immediate family’s welfare.

The Oregon Child Support Guideline has undergone some updates to it’s content, as of late…to keep in line with a federally mandated updating process every 4 years (I believe), yet these changes only seem to ‘tighten the screws’ even further toward the Obligor. There is scarce any real changes to the unfair details that encompass a majority of the subjects within the policy. The changes, as I said, affectively maintain the status quo of siphoning the maximum amount of money from those paying child support, with the new policy of adding further years to the indebtedness with the approval of continuing support through post-secondary schooling (college) for children over 18.

As I know you may not have the time or experience looking into this complex program, please bare with me as I will attempt to address the most alarming of its policy’s that I have a concern with:

Quick background-I have 2 joint children with my ex-wife, whom has enjoyed full custody of the children due to my inexperience with the law, and my rights as a father, which led to the award of custody of the children to her 8 years ago. In January of 2011, my ex was awarded the absurd amount of $1245 (plus $281 cost of medical) per month for child support, approximately 2 months after I acquired my first mortgage for my first home.

1) A major issue I have with the Oregon Child Support Guideline: It is shocking to read the guidelines proclaim it is based off the current Federal Poverty Guideline index [FPG] http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/12poverty.shtml#guidelines has …which I see also contains and spells out clearly a FAMILY scale that is being ignored. This table contains figures for increasing members of a persons family w/ increasing amounts of Self Support reserve equivalent, yet the Child Support Calculation/guideline completely disregards those increases in family members, (which SHOULD and do allow for dependants [including step-children] irrespective of child support orders) - Only allowing a single person poverty rate to support a family, in my case of 6, and claims to incorporate it's own calculation for additional children. -Which by simple demonstration on the online calculator, is nowhere near the amount allotted by that very federal guideline it claims to adhere to! Family self support reserve for 6= $3,011 per month at 100%, most other states compute FPG estimate at 125%…while our Oregon child support guidelines [henceforth OCSG] states is a mere $1,086! The difference is $1,925 dollars not counted toward self-support reserve for my family, but instead included as ‘available funds’ to pay child support. Clearly, it is biased to ONLY considering me a SINGLE, sole person…without any further dependants, with a minimum wage income…which clearly is NOT accurate or fair, to my situation!  Being in a middle class tax-bracket, I am also burdened much more on my taxes and expenses, including taxes taken out of the child support prior to its transfer to Obligee, where I cannot claim any of that back, [Without her written consent as per current IRS tax law].

The OCSG attempts to justify this glaring unfairness with the claim that my non-joint children are separately compensated for and included in an additional, separate calculation...well, a simple press of numbers in the online calculator discloses the fallacy of this statement, and exactly how much my 3 non-joint children’s support is ‘worth’ to Oregon- a mere $138.00 dollars! How is it that two school-age, joint children require $1245.00 dollars [plus insurance and medical] a month in child support, but my 3+ non-joint children, step child, and wife are allotted a mere $180 for their total support reserve!?? This is HIGHLY unrealistic, and obviously results in my family now being robbed of the very basics of life. Our money spent for groceries is probably 1/5^th the recommended amount required for normal, basic nutrition; and basic utilities like Gas, electric, garbage, vehicle costs, insurance, household costs [including home & yard maint. and mandatory HOA fee’s] have been paid late, overdue, and on numerous occasions on-notice to be shut-off if we hadn’t begun selling off our family’s meager personal possessions. These decreasing possessions are limited, and nearing their end, and have been the only thing keeping the heat on, (as credit card is now maxed out), but they will be gone very soon, leaving us with a major negative debt-to-income per month for even basic expenses. It literally is a weekly stress worrying if there will be enough money for gas for me to even get to my job, and working in a highly professional government environment, it is becoming embarrassing to not be able to afford proper clothing! All my work clothes are becoming tattered and I can’t even afford shoes for myself. My vehicle is not some fancy late model, but the same 13 year old Honda I’ve driven since I was active duty Air Force 13 years ago! It has 152 thousand miles and is now starting to need costly repairs and maintenance…there is no room in the current budget for this. If my car fails, I literally could not afford to repair it and get to my highly critical job operating our Hydro Electric Power system for this quarter of the country. I couldn’t afford a used car payment for a different vehicle under the current Child Support amount. This obviously has severe repercussions for the stability of my career as a Federal Employee!

2) To further skew the financial debt toward the Obligor, The Oregon Child Support guideline is based off of the Percent-of-obligor/Income Share models that many states use currently, and are based on only cost estimates from low-income families. Presumptive awards for moderate and high-income obligors are inappropriately extrapolated from low-income percentages and do not reflect actually on costs at other income levels. The presumptive award results in the custodial parent receiving a huge financial windfall - or profit - in excess of child costs. For typical income situations, the custodial parent ends up with a higher standard of living than the non-custodial parent (me) - even when the non-custodial parent earns significantly more than the custodial parent. This is an extraordinary benefit for the custodial parent and an extraordinary burden for the obligor. In my case, as with many others in my tax-bracket, it’s obvious that the custodial parent's profit is substantial.

3) Upon the latest recommendation, approved by the new Director of the Oregon Child Support Program, and despite STRONG  'philosophical disagreement' from those that seemed concerned and able to voice their opinion…it will be made official and more specified that the Obligor of child support WILL be ordered to support their joint children in post-secondary schooling [college]. This despite the obvious fact that no other American parent would or could EVER be legally forced to do the same for their children, in any non-custodial obligated manner! This seems a gross over-step of authority from a department of government which espouses the support of CHILDREN. The slippery slope seems to be getting ever closer to complete government enforcement over parental rights in ALL matters! Again, able to be rebutted? Yeah RIGHT.

4) All told, it is ridiculous that I, a hard working government employee, with a good paying job roughly 3x the minimum wage, can no longer afford to feed my children, to pay basic bills, nor afford a normal 4 bedroom home I purchased [ironically to house said non-joint children] because I’m now supporting a non-productive, using member of society, whom has learned quickly it is more beneficial to her [ex-wife] to NOT work, and simply soak up the financial windfall our court has bestowed upon her…not only from me, but 3 OTHER fathers as well! One cannot argue for the FAIRNESS of this system. The fact that there is no cap or limit to the presumed calculation, adds insult to injury. -Unfairly, there is no ‘ceiling’ on the child support amount calculated for higher income families. Being in a middle class tax-bracket, I get punished all the way around. I actually swallowed my pride once and attempted to apply for food stamps, and they [incredibly] do not count child support being taken out of my financial income, therefore I was refused -while before and after me, illegal immigrants were expediently approved- utilizing my tax dollars. What a country.

What motivation would any working father in my position ever have to work harder, to gain promotions or advancement, or better themselves for the sake of their family, if any gain is likewise handed right back to the Obligee (via periodic increases to child support)?? To say this system devastates the victims (mostly fathers) emotionally and financially is nothing, but it also seems to urge not one, but BOTH parties to become non-productive member of society!  I hold this as evidence that the OCSG is far from Just, as it should consider the glaring difference of the Federal Poverty Guideline FAMILY support reserve amount in my case, instead of the inaccurate and inappropriate SELF support amount for one low-income person.

5)  WHY was there entered a little tiny blurb at the very end of the 'RULES' of this guideline, that even if the Obligee agrees to a lesser amount, the SYSTEM/court/state will not allow any deviation from the 'presumed' amount more than...10% http://www.oregonchildsupport.gov/laws/rules/050_0765.pdf ? Wow, 10%! What a difference! What a reward for self-reliance! It seems clear what the intention of this policy is for.

6) Why am I, a non-criminal civilian…unable to request a simple paternity/DNA test to establish for the first time the paternity of my alleged daughter (joint-child), whom is now 12, in lieu of recent and gathering evidence that she may not actually be my biological child? Simply because someone wrote in the OCSG that "past 90 days of being misled to sign a voluntary acknowledgement of paternity 'document', I can't legally establish this at all"? Why? Because the government doesn't want to potentially lose a paying member of the child support club? Therefore, I'm to be punished for 20+ years for a 'crime' I didn't commit. Sad that even De@th Row prisoners get this right to DNA evidence and vindication! The policy needs to be removed; the allotted time to prove Paternity should have no ‘deadline’ to be challenged. What’s right is right, and rewarding the deceit and lies of an irresponsible mother (I acknowledge my part) with child support from potentially the wrong father should be allowed to be challenged. There are no ‘deadlines’ for a child’s biological father in reality. And he should not be allowed a ‘get-out-of-responsibility-free’ card due to statute of limitations!

7) I have an issue with the fact that I cannot claim my step-child whom resides in my home and does not get child support. The OCSG states:

Additional Children (formerly non-joint children)

Enter the number of children not included in this calculation that the parent has a duty to support. Only include children that reside in the parent’s home or for whom the parent is ordered to pay ongoing support. Children ages 18-20 and attending school (see ORS 107.108 and OAR 137-055-5110) and stepchildren may only be counted if the parent is ordered to pay support for that child. The parent’s income will be reduced to reflect the portion of income required for the additional children. OAR 137-050-0720(2) and Child Support Worksheet, lines 1c and 1d.

-Am I or any other father in the country court ordered to pay support for my own non-joint children?? No…and yet I am allowed to claim them within the simple definition of 'reside in parent's home' to satisfy the IRS! Nowhere does it state I need to be a legal father, and it clearly states EITHER resides in home OR ordered to pay ongoing support. Why would any step father be ORDERED to pay support to their stepchild whom resides in their own home??[This obviously assumes parents aren’t divorced]. This is inane made-up B.S. Who created and signed off on this 'rule'? I should be allowed to claim my step-child  as ‘Loco Parentis’ within the OCSG calculation the same as my biological non-joint children, when I can prove that she either doesn’t have an existing child support order with another father, or she does and does not receive payment. Either situation does not seem to matter to the IRS, why is the Child Support law above this Federal example? This clearly demonstrates an unfair bias to the support I require for my actual family’s needs.

8) Due to yet another loop-hole in the flawed logic of the OCSG- I have arrears from the last modification hearing, because the judge ordered a full months payment of the new amount IN RETRO and PRIOR to the actually hearing where he even signed the modification! They list this authority as ‘Effective to the first of the month in which its order is signed’. In what country is a person incurred at DEBT before a contract is even SIGNED!?? Why is this completely illegal in every other facet of the legal system, but somehow [and only recently it seems] completely legal for judges to do this for child support!  When my original divorce decree assigned child support, the payments began on the FOLLOWING paycheck, after my payroll processed it. When there was a first modification to my child support, again it affected my next or second paycheck after the order was signed. WHY, during my last hearing, was I billed an entire $1245.00 for the month of January…NOT deducting for my already previously paid child support amount for that month…when the order was heard and signed on the 21rst of that month!  This should be ILLEGAL and is BARBARIC. I have had automatic deductions to my pay for 8 years for child support, and you know what? All this did was put me in arrears unfairly, give me the 'dead-beat' dad stigma by DHS’s and our governments presumption, jeopardize not only my much needed tax return, but also completely and negatively affects my credit report as well! As it of COURSE shows up as a BAD debt! This in-turn prevents me from effectively attempting to refinance my mortgage. Due to no fault of my own. That’s just the way it now apparently works.

9) Speaking of negative credit, I wholeheartedly believe the way the Oregon Child Support method of electronically deducting, processing, and paying out my support is in violation of laws that are supposed to protect me from the above situation; Fair Credit Billing Act, Federal Equal Credit Opportunity Act, and the Federal Consumer Credit Protection Agency. Since the way they process my payments, always leaves a running ‘past balance’ or arrears amount, it is unfairly reported as a bad debt -impacting my credit report and score, while I’m fully complying with on-time [Read: Automatic!] payments! This is in direct violation of federal law, and they have made no effort to correct this process. I believe I was told by my case worker, “Yeah…it is what it is…that’s just how we process it…There’s nothing I can do about it, sorry!” Sorry for illegally ruining my credit? Unacceptable!

10) WHY is the very department that is solely responsible for updating and editing these policy's and rules within the very SAME agency as the one that directly benefits from the results of these crippling 'rules'?? If this doesn't out-right scream of fraud toward tax-payers, under the guise of 'providing money for the poor children’ I don’t know what does! 

11) And lastly, but perhaps the most obscene example of government over-stepping my basic civil liberties, is the matter of post-secondary support. Upon the latest recommendation, approved by the new Director of the Oregon Child Support Program, and [by their own words] despite STRONG ‘philosophical disagreement' from those that seemed concerned and able to voice their opinion…it will be made official and more specified that the Obligor of child support WILL be ordered to support their joint children in post-secondary schooling [college]. -Simply because their parents split up? To me, that basically implies they've given themselves the authority to order ALL OTHER American citizen/parents to pay for their child to attend school, or the same punishments shall be in order- ruining our credit, throwing us in jail, revoking our drivers licenses, generally fostering public 'brow-beating' campaigns against all the 'dead-beat-dads' out there that literally are having half their paychecks taken and given to the other party. This despite the obvious fact that no other American parent would or could EVER be legally forced to do the same for their children, in any non-custodial obligated manner! This seems a gross over-step of authority from a department of government which espouses the welfare of CHILDREN. The slippery slope seems to be getting ever closer to complete government enforcement over parental rights in ALL matters! This cannot even be constitutionally legal!

There is numerous mention in the OCSG’s of the ability to ‘Rebut’ this situation, and the above mentioned topics that affect the presumed amount, if it be deemed and proven inappropriate, but in reality, Judges do not find anything other than extreme, extra-ordinary [medical] costs worthy of consideration for adjusting the presumed amounts. Apparently, they exclude having a home, providing food and lights on, as ‘routine expenses’ that aren’t a factor to be considered. Therefore, they expect me to move my family of 6 into a 2 bedroom apartment and eat macaroni and cheese every single day, and walk 25 miles to work!

I will tell you I’ve tried, with 3 separate hearings now over the last 3 years, with two different Judges, to rebut the presumed amount, and the mindset is eerily the same at every hearing. It seems there is a severe disconnect with judges, who either shirk their ability to allow any variance to the presumed calculator amount, or flat-out ignore considering anything other than extreme medical conditions as the ONLY reason to deviate from the presumed amount! Either they don’t know how to fill in the block “If amount deviates from presumed amounts, list reasons here:’ or they are apparently too scared to be fair to just a few that try to argue for a fair amount. Perhaps because of the feeling they are ‘going against law/ policy’ or worse, aren’t bringing in the maximum amount of dollars possible into the obvious money-making indentured-servitude program they argue is ‘for the children’. What about MY non- joint children!??

Why do these glaring injustices keep getting ignored, unaddressed, and made worse [more severe] every time it’s updated?  Does one have to file a civil suit against the Oregon DHS to protect their [other] immediate families’ well-being??

Of course I want my joint children to have a good life, but we both know they don't always get that, in fact, the almost 400% increase in my child support hasn't gone to their welfare at all,  no more food in her house, no new clothes for school...nothing. Just her having more fun spending on herself. I know this isn't the case with everyone, but I've also fought for custody to provide them the same lifestyle my family WAS starting to have...and a conciliation services evaluation [To determine where the best household for the children to reside] is always ignored and never entertained. It seems the children aren't really as important to my judge, as maintaining the status quo. And that is truly a sad testament to how far our judicial system has strayed from something it was set out to do -for the children's welfare. Let’s just call this by what it effectively has become - Disguised Alimony! I tell you, the fact that my ex-wife does NOT have to work, instead it's more beneficial for her NOT to, and has numerous children by other fathers (After me, thank you) whom she ALSO receives support from, now has a MUCH higher quality of lifestyle, doing NOTHING, while I WORK HARD at TWO jobs to provide 40% of my NET income to two joint children...while my 3 Non-joint children suffer, are literally hungry every minute of the day, our utilities overdue...because they are worth a pittance 180 dollars allowance from this Oregon Calculator!?

I often am advised, that I need to get a lawyer. I cannot afford a lawyer…to handle these numerous and complicated issues I bring up here, as a bonus side-effect of the inappropriate amount of Child Support being withheld from my pay. This obviously puts me at a severe disadvantage to have any of my legal rights addressed in court. In hearings I am completely bull-dozed by the judge, the fact that I didn’t have representation an annoyance to them, and more important than any concerns I legitimately attempted to have addressed, in a rushed 15 minute hearing.

What upsets me most, is what I mentioned briefly above, the whole program seems to not focus on the benefit to the children, but instead has grown to become a thinly-veiled and aggressively protected program to solicit extra funds into the Department of Human Services, and affiliated state programs. Without dismissing my concern as a mere ‘conspiracy theory’, let’s be honest and see this for what is actually happening: The state government is, of it's own self-interest, maximizing its profit/income by taking advantage of a mutually beneficial financial kickback from the federal government, at my [and thousands of other unknowing fathers] expense. I.e.: The more this formula makes me pay, the more money the department of human services can report to the Feds, the more federal kickbacks are rewarded, and the more temporary interest my money makes within their banking system –at my expense! Ironically, they seem to pride themselves on the fact that they do this to people, all in the name of the children! The Oregon DHS gains more profit when they maximize my ordered support. That would be more accurately called a 'Conflict of Interest' or FRAUD, and by the definition of the term, corrupt government practice toward hard-working tax-payers both Obligor and Obligee!

While all this seems to fly under the radar of most Americans, especially most uneducated, naïve or ignorant fathers, I have done much to learn why this is happening to me. I can only hope that this lengthy email has demonstrated some very fundamental flaws with our Child Support System, and though the policies may be only updated infrequently, and with much bureaucratic discussion, I feel it extremely important to address these concerns immediately, as they are very much borderline on violating our constitutional, if not God-given rights, to thrive, protect our property and ALL of our family’s livelihoods –to pursue happiness!

Thank you for your time and consideration of this matter. I hope that you may demonstrate vigilance in upholding the civil rights of an unseen group of individuals suffering greatly at the hands of a flawed government program. I humbly beg of you, that you may make some change, toward correcting these immoral policies.

Respectfully,

Matthew *******

TSgt. U.S. Air Force; Father and Husband.

A reminder of our CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS:

8) Shall allow no slavery or involuntary servitude except as punishment for a crime of which the party shall have been duly convicted.

Security (Life):

(2) Not to be injured or abused.

Personal Liberty:

(8) To express or publish one's opinions or those of others.

(10) To be secure in one's person, house, papers, vehicle, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Private Property:

(12) To acquire, have and use the means necessary to exercise the above natural rights and pursue happiness, specifically including:

(1) A private residence, from which others may be excluded.

(2) Tools needed for one's livelihood.

(3) Personal property, which others may be denied the use of.

Non-natural rights of personhood, created by social contract:

(1) To enter into contracts, and thereby acquire contractual rights, to secure the means to exercise the above natural rights.

(3) To petition an official for redress of grievances and get action thereon in accordance with law, subject to the resources available thereto.

(4) To petition a legislator and get consideration thereof, subject to resources available thereto.

(5) To petition a court for redress of grievances and get a decision thereon, subject to resources available thereto.

(6) Not to have one's natural rights individually disabled except through due process of law,…