Why the hell is HRC campaign $ going to "NC Child Support Collections" ($1,833.04)

[rainbow4321]

Go down to the letter N section



http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2008/M3/C00431569/B_PAYEE_C00431569.html

[grantcart]

1. has an employee with court ordered garnishing of wages for child support

[ecstatic]

2. a black baby we don't know about?

just kidding!!!!

:hide:

[easy_b94]

3. Wow

[bigtree]

49. ***Who in the Obama camp spent $600 at Tiffany's????***

Obama staff mum on Tiffany's purchase

BY MICHAEL SAUL
DAILY NEWS POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT

Sunday, March 23rd 2008, 4:00 AM

Barack Obama's campaign tossed around nearly $600 at Tiffany's last month - for a trinket that remains a secret.

Obama's team tapped his flush campaign bank account to pay the $572.25 tab at the famed jeweler last month, recently released federal fund-raising records show.

When asked about the curious expenditure, campaign spokeswoman Jen Psaki said, "That was mistakenly charged to a campaign credit card and the money has been refunded to the campaign."

Psaki insisted that the senator did not make the purchase himself but she refused to say whether the gift was in any way connected to him or his family.

Psaki declined to release any details about what precisely was purchased from the store, who received the purchase, or how the charging error occurred.

"That's all we're going with this," Psaki insisted, shutting down questions from the Daily News. "We're done talking about it."


http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/03/23/2008-03-23_obama_staff_mum_on_tiffanys_purchase.html

[BeyondGeography]

4. Heading the list of suspects

[xultar]

7. How very intelligent.

[BeyondGeography]

9. Sorry

[ecstatic]

10. omg! that pic is hilarious!

no pun intended!

[SoCalDem]

45. Hilldenburgerriffic

:)

[rug]

11. Don't worry, your hand will never sue you for child support.

[xultar]

13. I can't stand Obama or Hillary. They are the SAME. You're supporting a black male version of HRC.

Obama has all the little white kids fooled.

[BeyondGeography]

15. I know

[xultar]

18. Why are you showing me black people. Are we, black folk your new favorite friends?

You gonna invite us over now> Will you BBQ and serve greens and corn bread?

Are we kewl with cha? Can I date your son?

Black folk aren't fooled. They are just supportin a bruva. Iss all.

[BeyondGeography]

19. Actually, I was hoping for some spiritual counseling like your boy Bill

[xultar]

20. I have some white friends that say the most racist shit...but they support Obama

They say racist shit who support OBama but they have no clue...

Shit like I like Obama cuz he has soul. I like Obama because he is so diverse. Obama can feel the rhythm of the country. They wouldn't say that about a white candidate.

I just ignore their bullshit cus they don't even know what they said is racist.

Those are the fooled ones.

[BeyondGeography]

22. I like him because he opposed the war

Had he not done that (or had Hillary opposed it, too), he shouldn't have bothered running.

[grantcart]

30. So why do you come in here?

"Just so you know, I still don't reallhy give a shit about the Democratic Primary" xultar

[sandnsea]

5. Because that's how child support works

Somebody in NC has child support taken out of their check. Any time someone goes to work for you you have to give their social security number to child support. Most of the time these days, the child support is just automatically calculated and collected through the state.

[rucky]

43. But it's so much more fun to speculate!

[dsc]

6. might it be that she has, gasp, employed a divorced person

who has children. Damn that evil woman. All divorcees should die penniless in the streets.

[davidinalameda]

8. a divorced person who has refused to follow a court order

to pay child support

wages aren't garnished unless the person in question has failed to follow a court judgment ordering payment

[dsc]

16. that is totally untrue

In most cases it is now a default position to have support withheld. Something post 5 points out.

[davidinalameda]

24. I work in collection law

it's not default position

its up to the individual to pay the judgment

wage garnishments only happen when the individual ignores the court order

[Drachasor]

25. I think we'd have to look up how it is in NC.....a brief look indicates garnishes are not mandatory

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/north_carolina/ncfaq_04

1) If I have custody will I receive child support payments?
The court will order that child support be paid to the custodial parent by the non-custodial parent. In North Carolina child support payments are based on guidelines. These guidelines are adhered to by the court in the typical case; however, the court may deviate from the guidelines. The non-custodial parent is ordered by the court to pay a percentage of that parent's gross monthly income.

2) What can I do if my spouse refuses to pay child support?
The Child Support Enforcement Agency is a government agency which works with custodial parents to obtain child support. Private attorneys also assist custodial parents in the collection of child support. A number of remedies are available for the enforcement of child support including seizure of real estate and personal property, orders that bonds be posted, assignment of wages, garnishment, arrest, and interception of income tax refunds. The Child Support Enforcement Agency does not require payment of its fees in advance and it is the most cost efficient mechanism for the collection of child support by those who are unable to pay the fees required by private attorneys.



(Now, all that said, I don't think this is a big deal as far as Hillary's campaign is concerned).

[davidinalameda]

26. I don't think it's a big deal for the campaign either

I just wish people wouldn't comment on things they know nothing about

[Drachasor]

27. While we're wishing....

I'd really like this whole mess in Iraq to go away. Also, religious extremism (particularly the violent sort) is a bit much for me as well. :)

[davidinalameda]

28. amen

[Jazzgirl]

36. I do know when my brother got divorced and went to court,

they automatically setup the automatic support deductions. He was never late. This was set out in court during the divorce.

[blogslut]

29. Not necessarily

The person may not be in violation of a court order. They may be following a court order.

For example, my child's father has his wages garnished not because we divorced. He pays because we were never married and he refused to live up to his obligations as a father. I took the matter to the TX State Attorney General's office and they are the ones that garnish his monthly wages.

[dsc]

31. that just plain isn't true in regards to child support

In most cases now as part of divorce support is withheld. Ordinary debt you are absolutely correct. Child support you are just plain wrong.

[Hepburn]

32. Not true....

...I am a retired attorney and I have done literally thousands of cases involving child support. If a payor is current, there are no grounds for a wage assignment. I came out of retirement for about a month recently and did a case for a friend who has a nasty ex wife. Not only is this guy current, he has paid more than what was due under the order. The court denied her request for a wage assignment because of this.

Now...there are county agencies that the payee has a right to use to collect the payments ~~ and that is his/her choice. But using that agency does not mean that there are any arrears involved or that the payor is a fit subject of a wage assignment. It just means that the county gets the money, keeps the record and then sends the payment on to the custodial parent. I used to think this was a good idea because there would be an office record of what was paid and when if a dispute arose with claims of CS arrearages. I have now seen too many errors ~~ particularly in Los Angeles County ~~ to think this was a good idea for anyone involved.

[WolverineDG]

34. Wrong, see my post downstream n/t

[parasim]

23. No it's not.

When I paid child support, it was state law for it to be garnished from my wages.

I did not fail to follow a court judgement ordering payment.

At one point, when I was between jobs, I had to give them the check myself. Which I did and never missed one payment. Once I was working again, it again was garnished from my wages.

[WolverineDG]

33. Not true

In every divorce case I've done, I've always included a wage withholding order. It works to the benefit of both parties: the custodial parent knows that as long as the noncustodial parent has that job, he/she will receive child support. The noncustodial parent knows there is a record being kept of payments so that 20 years down the line, the custodial parent can't go complain that he/she never received child support.

dg

[Hepburn]

37. Long ago I used to do that....

...but being in Los Angeled County, I do not think that is a good idea at this time. There are often many mistakes and they cut both ways. For my support paying parents, I tell them to keep a small box, like a recipe box and file in order by date copies of cancelled checks, receipts, etc., or any other document that evidences that for a particular payment that in fact it was made.

I tell them that this takes a few minutes to do this for each payment and it could prevent a life time of hurt if at a time down the road there is a question as to whether or not a payment was made. In Calif, there basically is no tolling on a CS order. So a case brought on some payment(s) that was to be made long ago can really be hard to defend against.

As to the assignment ~~ under Calif law, if the payor has been current for at least one year, the payee is not entitled to a wage assignment. He/she as the payee can still unilaterally have the payor pay through the county, but there is no automatic entitlement to a wage assignment. One has to have grounds.

[WolverineDG]

41. Texas law is different

a wwo is required, regardless of whether the NCP is current or not. More times than not, without a court order, child support won't get paid.

And yes, mistakes are made, but the NCP can bring in his payment records from his employer showing that the c/s was withheld & turned over to the State. I've had the AG's office eat dirt on that a couple of times already & filed sanctions against them for a really egregious case where they were taking almost all of my client's disability check while not crediting him with the payments being made directly to SSA to the children on his behalf (as required by state law). While I didn't get any money back for him (he had an arrearage already, due to not working while his disability application was pending), I got the AG's attention with it. :evilgrin:

dg

[Hepburn]

44. SS Disability?

They were taking all of the client's SS disability check? My understanding on that is that if a payor parent is disabled and is receiving SS disability, the minor children are eligible for a payment directly from SS. In Calif, if that happens, then it is a dollar for dollar offset on any SS obligation that the payor might have. And, usually the SS benefits to the children are much greater than the CS obligation of the payor. If the payee parent is on SS Diability, then the kiddos still are eligible to receive SS benefits and what they receive is credited against the order and the payor parent pays the difference. (California system and law.)

Glad you could get $$$ back on your case ~~ the deal is with an overpayment in Calif, the money comes back when the child is not longer a fit subject of a child support order ~~ assuming the payor is still current.

Interesting discussion ~~ I have found that when people familiar with the systems in different states start discussing how awards are figured, monies collected, etc., it is like we are often discussing different countries and not just different states!

Thanks for the info on TX....:hi:

[WolverineDG]

46. Yes, but a new federal law allows for them to take up to 60%

if there is an arrearage. (can you believe that?) In this case there was, but only during the time while his request for disability was pending.

Texas law also requires that he be given credit for payments sent directly to the custodial parent. Well, this particular AG's office was of the opinion (despite my phone calls & proof of the statute to the contrary) that unless the payments went through the state's disbursement unit, then he was to receive no credit. So, they just let the arrears pile up to over $10k! :grr: They also refused to modify his child support obligation to reflect his new (lower) income. That sanctions motion really got their attention, though. heh.

dg

[Hepburn]

47. Wow....

....60% of SS Disability?? That is unreal!

Good for you on helping you client. Yes, the non-payment of support is a very bad thing and the uncollected sums are horrendous. But what gets me is that the DA Fam Support (that is what they are called in Calif) go after shit that is often minor instead of going after the true deadbeats. The problem I have seen is that many of those who have huge arrearages are self-employed, family employed, etc., and can be harder than hell to pin down. So, yeah, they get the easy ones and let the hard ones sit.

Question: In TX do they have a professional license/driver's license suspension for non-payors?

[WolverineDG]

48. Yes, as well as

(probably more important, strangely enough) suspension of hunting & fishing licenses, as well as professional licenses (doctors, dentists, lawyers, electricians, etc)

"Whaddya mean I can't get a deer stamp? I don't want to pay child support! I want to spend my money on a deer lease & get drunk in a deer blind!" :crazy:

dg

[Hepburn]

50. OMG........

.....I know the mentality! :rofl:

[EffieBlack]

40. Or maybe the campaign has GASP hired someone who was out of work and struggling to make ends meet

and couldn't make their child support payments - and now that the Clinton campaign has given them a job, they can pay their bills.

Everyone who doesn't pay child support is not a scofflaw. People are struggling and many people just can't make it without a job with a living wage.

If the Clinton campaign has hired local people who need jobs, more power to them!

[davidpdx]

12. I guess it is if you don't take care of your kids

Which would explain the garnishments.

[dsc]

17. see posts 5 and 16

It is commonly withheld even without non payment.

[EffieBlack]

42. You DO realize that some people are too poor to "take care of their kids"

For a group of Democrats, people are awfully snarking and judgmental in assuming that anyone who is having child support paid from their paycheck must be some kind of a deadbeat.

You DO know that we're in a recession, don't you? When Obama talks about helping people get back on their feet, he's talking about people who CAN'T PAY THEIR BILLS BECAUSE THE BUSH ECONOMY SUCKS.

It's really sad to see supposed Democrats support their candidates on theory but then show that, in the real world, they have the same superior, judgmental attitude toward poor people that Republicans display.

[FreakinDJ]

14. Loved that song..

its a baby not a pay check lady

it needed to be said

[WolverineDG]

35. Yes because God forbid men be held financially responsible

for their children.

dg

[JohnnyLib2]

21. I have a remarkable suggestion:

Perhaps it was a legitimate expense, which would include the type of automatic deduction being mentioned.

[EffieBlack]

38. Probably a staff member has had their wages garnished for child support

Not that complicated or sinister.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

39. I Don't Believe This Stupid Fuckin Thread Is Still On Top.

And no, my kicking it makes no difference, since as of now, it was on top anyway.

But what the fuck is wrong with you petty people? Jesus christ, this is the level of shit we bicker about now? How fucking stupid.