Snow Knows Fraud

NCPs demand "No taxation by misrepresentation"
http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/stories/u-z/untershine012803.htm

Jim Untershine, GZS of LB, 01-28-03

John Snow is expected to be appointed by President Bush to fill the Secretary of Treasury Cabinet post. Allegations of a misdemeanor traffic violation and a frivolous family law proceeding may be the only thing standing in Snow's way. \1 More than 12 million noncustodial parents (NCP) across the nation are on the edge of their seat in anticipation of the events that may follow.

"No taxation by misrepresentation" may be the credo of this new family law tea party. Provoked by this new age of accountability, John Snow may immediately take action to stop the extermination of taxpayers paying child support and identify the various forms of fraud used against them. Snow is an NCP and father of 2 children involving the state of Maryland. This family law insight may motivate his attempt to snatch heterosexual taxpayers, who dare to raise children, from the jaws of family law genocide. \2

John Snow may have the clarity to identify the ways and means by which implements of our own creation are being used as a weapon of mass destruction against us. John Snow may identify the fraudulent reporting of the financial demands forced on NCPs to the US House Ways and Means Committee and invoke a form of legal dogma by demanding that our legislators "Make it accurate, or make it law". John Snow may demand that states enforce federal laws that protect taxpayers who pay child support from unscrupulous employers, thereby insuring the president's new welfare reform package is a "saving grace" rather than a "coup de grâce".

Every NCP, who is Secretary of the Treasury Department, controls the following agencies

Every NCP, who pays child support, is a victim of consumer fraud, \6

Every NCP, who pays child support, pays the same taxes as any other taxpayer.

Every NCP, who doesn't pay child support, doesn't pay taxes.

Every NCP, who doesn't pay child support, is unemployed.

Citations:

\1 "White House standing by Snow nomination for Treasury job despite revelations of DUI arrest, child-support dispute", Martin Crutsinger, AP Economics Writer, 01-22-03, http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030122/ap_wo_en_po/na_pol_us_snow_nomination_1
\2 USC 18 1091 - "Genocide"
(a) Basic Offense. -
Whoever, whether in time of peace or in time of war, in a circumstance described in subsection (d) and with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in substantial part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group as such -
(1) kills members of that group;
(2) causes serious bodily injury to members of that group;
(3) causes the permanent impairment of the mental faculties of members of the group through drugs, torture, or similar techniques;
(4) subjects the group to conditions of life that are intended to cause the physical destruction of the group in whole or in part;
(5) imposes measures intended to prevent births within the group; or
(6) transfers by force children of the group to another group; or attempts to do so, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).
\3 http://www.ustreas.gov/cgi-bin/redirect.cgi?http://www.treas.gov/fincen/
\4 http://www.ustreas.gov/cgi-bin/redirect.cgi?http://www.irs.treas.gov/
\5 http://www.ustreas.gov/cgi-bin/redirect.cgi?http://www.treas.gov/usss/
\6 USC 15 1666 b3 - "Correction of billing errors", "Billing error"; (3) A reflection on a statement of goods or services not accepted by the obligor or his designee or not delivered to the obligor or his designee in accordance with the agreement made at the time of a transaction.
\7 TANF benefits across all states was extracted from Table 7-9 of the US House of Representatives, Committee on Ways and Means, 2000 Greenbook, Section 7, entitled "Maximum Combined TANF And Food Stamp Benefit For Families Of One To Six Persons, January 1, 2000", http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/useftp.cgi?IPaddress=162.140.64.37&filename=wm014_07.pdf&directory=/diskb/wais/data/106_green_book; Food stamp calculations assume that the family does not receive an excess shelter deduction. In very low benefit States, combined benefits shown reflect the maximum food stamp allotment for the family size, but in some States the excess shelter deduction would increase food stamps (by up to $83 monthly—more in Alaska and Hawaii). Calculations assume a single-parent family with no earned income and use normal rounding rules. Table prepared by the Congressional Research Service.
\8 Interstate child support guideline data was obtained from AllLaw.com and assumes 0% custody, $4,400/mo NCP net income (Vermont and New Hampshire are not included in the analysis since you must pay to find out how much you would owe in these states), http://alllaw.com/calculators/Childsupport/
\9 The Institute for Family and Social Responsibility, Maurine Pirog-Good, based at the University of Indiana at Bloomington, and is paid by the federal government to operate as the clearinghouse for child support enforcement statistics, http://www.spea.indiana.edu/fasr/
\10 Interstate child support guideline data was obtained from Table 8-2 of the US House of Representatives, Committee on Ways and Means 2000 Greenbook, Section 8, entitled "Amount Of Child Support Awarded By State Guidelines In Various Cases", http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/useftp.cgi?IPaddress=162.140.64.21&filename=wm014_08.pdf&directory=/disk2/wais/data/106_green_book; Pirog, Klotz, and Buyers (1997) have examined the differences in child support guidelines across States. Their approach was to define five hypothetical cases of custodial mothers and noncustodial fathers that capture a range of differences in income, expenses, and other factors that influence the amount of child support payments computed under the guidelines adopted by the various States. State 1997 guidelines were then applied to each of the five cases to compute the amount of child support that would be due. In each of the five cases, the mother and father are divorced. The father lives alone while the mother lives with the couples' two children, ages 7 and 13. The father pays union dues of $30 per month and health insurance for the children of $25 per month. The mother incurs monthly employment-related child care expenses of $150. The income of the father and mother that is entitled "Case D" specifies a father = $4,400/mo and a mother = $1,760/mo.
\11 USC 42 666 b6Di - "Requirement Of Statutorily Prescribed Procedures To Improve Effectiveness Of Child Support Enforcement", "Withholding from income of amounts payable as support"
(D) Provision must be made for the imposition of a fine against any employer who -
(i) discharges from employment, refuses to employ, or takes disciplinary action against any noncustodial parent subject to income withholding required by this subsection because of the existence of such withholding and the obligations or additional obligations which it imposes upon the employer.
\12 USC 15 1673 b2B - "Restriction on garnishment"; (B) where such individual is not supporting such a spouse or dependent child described in clause (A), 60 per centum of such individual's disposable earnings for that week; except that, with respect to the disposable earnings of any individual for any workweek, the 50 per centum specified in clause (A) shall be deemed to be 55 per centum and the 60 per centum specified in clause (B) shall be deemed to be 65 per centum, if and to the extent that such earnings are subject to garnishment to enforce a support order with respect to a period which is prior to the twelve-week period which ends with the beginning of such workweek.

Jim Untershine, 824 E Pass Rd #3, Gulfport, MS 39507, gzs@gndzerosrv.com, www.gndzerosrv.com


Jim Untershine holds a BSEE from Mississippi State University and has 13 years experience in feedback control system design. Mr. Untershine is currently using the teachings of Werner Heisenberg and Henry David Thoreau to expose Family Law in California as the exploitation of children for money and the indentured servitude of heterosexual taxpayers who dare to raise children in this country.


White House standing by Snow nomination for Treasury job
despite revelations of DUI arrest, child-support dispute
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030122/ap_wo_en_po/na_pol_us_snow_nomination_1

MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer, 01-22-03

WASHINGTON - The White House says revelations that John Snow was arrested for drunken driving in 1982 and was involved in a child-support dispute with his ex-wife should not disqualify him from joining President George W. Bush's Cabinet as Treasury secretary.

The Bush administration learned about both issues as part of its vetting process of Snow's nomination, presidential spokesman Ari Fleischer told reporters late Tuesday "It's not relevant to his duties. We support him," Fleischer said.

Fleischer spoke after the Senate Finance Committee released a questionnaire Snow filled out in which he was asked, among other things, whether he had ever been charged with a criminal offense.

"In 1982 I was arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol in West Valley City, Utah," Snow said. "I was never convicted of that charge and the prosecuting attorney voluntarily dismissed the charge before trial."

Snow said that in connection with the incident he paid a $334 fine "for making an unauthorized left turn with my automobile. I have never been charged with or convicted of any other offense."

In an addendum to the questionnaire, Snow disclosed that his ex-wife, Frederica Wheeler, sued him in Montgomery County, Maryland, in March 1988, alleging that he failed to pay child support and other costs associated with the care of his two sons.

Snow said he denied the charges, but the court found he failed to pay child support for his son Ian over a 19-month period and failed to pay Ian's transportation and allowance costs at college.

Snow told the committee that he and his ex-wife settled the dispute in January 1991 "to spare the family the difficulty of a trial."

Reached late Tuesday night, Snow spokesman Dan Murphy said Snow would not have any further comment.

"This is a personal issue and the White House is the best place for comment," Murphy said.

Fleischer noted that the DUI charges had been dismissed. He said in the child-support dispute, the ex-wife's claim was made even though the son had lived with Snow and Snow believed he had fulfilled his obligations under the agreement.

Bush picked Snow, chairman of the CSX Corp. railroad company, last month to replace his first Treasury secretary, Paul O'Neill, who was ousted in a Cabinet shake-up of the administration's economic team.

Snow, who is scheduled to appear for a one-day Senate hearing Jan. 28, had been expected to face tough questioning about Bush's new $674 billion economic stimulus program, which Democrats contend is weighted too heavily toward tax breaks for the wealthy and provides too little immediate support for the struggling economy.

It was unclear how the new revelations might affect the nomination, which had been expected to encounter little opposition.

Snow has announced that he would forgo a lucrative severance package estimated to total up to $15 million that the CSX board could have awarded him.

Given last year's revelations about corporate accounting scandals, Snow was also expected to face questions next week about his management decisions as the head of CSX, the Richmond, Virginia-based railroad that he built into the largest freight line in the Eastern United States.

Snow, who held several top jobs in the Ford administration, has won widespread praise from business groups and lawmakers for his consensus-building abilities and his skill at dealing with Congress.

Supporters say he will be a capable salesman for the administration's economic program, in contrast to the sharp-spoken O'Neill.