SEARCH

Custom Search
Showing posts with label embezzlement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label embezzlement. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Breaking News: Sandy Death toll is now 90


These are the latest reports as of 3:32 PCT


At least 48 dead, millions without power in Sandy's aftermath
Fox News - ‎32 minutes ago‎
NEW YORK - The misery of superstorm Sandy's devastation grew Tuesday as millions along the U.S. East Coast faced life without power or mass transit for days, and huge swaths of New York City remained eerily quiet.


Race Narrows as Campaign Enters Its Final Week
By JEFF ZELENY and MARJORIE CONNELLY
Published: October 30, 2012

COLUMBUS, Ohio — President Obama and Mitt Romney enter the closing week of the campaign in an exceedingly narrow race, according to the latest poll by The New York Times and CBS News, with more voters now viewing Mr. Romney as a stronger leader on the economy and Mr. Obama as a better guardian of the middle class.

New York The Powerfull Sandy Hurricane


Hurricane Sandy: 'The worst is yet to come' says New York's Mayor Michael Bloomberg


Sunday, July 15, 2012

OBAMA'S SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER CHALLENGED





by JACK CASHILL

If Barack Obama has an immediate eligibility problem, it is more likely to derive from the Social Security Number he has been using for the last 35 years than from his birth certificate.

Ohio private investigator Susan Daniels has seen to that. On Monday, July 2, she filed suit in Geauga County (Ohio) Common Pleas Court demanding that Jon Husted, Ohio secretary of state, remove Obama’s name from the ballot until Obama can prove the validity of his Social Security Number.

Daniels, who has vetted thousands of Social Security Numbers for numerous other clients, has done her homework. In her filing, she thoroughly documents her contention “that Barack Obama has repeatedly, consistently, and with intent misrepresented himself by using a fraudulently obtained Social Security Number.”

To acquire appropriate standing in court, Daniels has gone to the trouble of establishing herself as a valid write-in candidate for president. Before she is through, this 70-something mother of seven, who has been a licensed Ohio PI since 1995, may cause Obama more trouble than the Romney campaign.

Daniels started her investigation in August 2009. Given her profession, she has been able to access a variety of proprietary databases. What she learned without much trouble is that Obama has been using a Social Security Number with the prefix “042″ since 1986.

As she discovered, the “042″ number is reserved for the exclusive use of individuals who register in Connecticut. When she ran 10 sequential numbers before and after Obama’s, all returned with the documentation “issued 1977-1979 in CT.”

When Daniels ran the numbers immediately flanking Obama’s, she came to the firm conviction that Obama’s number was issued in March 1977 in Connecticut.

By all accounts, as Daniels thoroughly documents, Obama was then a 15-year-old living in Hawaii. There is no record of him even visiting Connecticut in or near this time frame.

To have gotten a Social Security card at this time Obama would have had to show up for a “mandatory in-person interview.” This could not have taken place in Connecticut. Obama’s sister, Maya, by contrast, uses a number appropriate for a Hawaiian resident.

Daniels checked other databases as well to validate her findings, including the Massachusetts Department of Motor Vehicles and the IRS. Yes, Obama used the 042 number to get a driver’s license when at Harvard and as recently as on his 2009 income tax return.


In her research, Daniels kept coming across what she calls a “marked anomaly,” one she had never seen before – multiple birthdates listed for the same person. The 08/04/1961 and 04/08/1961 variation made sense, but the frequent appearance of the year “1890″ did not.

The ample evidence Daniels gathered led her to believe that the 042 number Obama has been using “had previously been issued to another person,” one who lived in Connecticut between 1977 and 1979 and who was born in 1890.

To finish reading this article, click here!


Friday, July 13, 2012

City Retiree's Plan to sue Stockton






A group of Stockton retirees is seeking a restraining order against the bankrupt city's efforts to cut their health benefits, part of the city's "pendency plan" aimed at keeping it solvent while it seeks protections from creditors.

The city informed retirees by letter they must pay their premiums by July 30 or "medical coverage will be canceled retroactive to July 1."

Promises of lifelong health benefits have been blamed in part for Stockton's failure, which was also brought on by the housing bust, unemployment and borrowing for downtown development that did not bring expected results.

PHOTOS: California cities in bankruptcy

Dwane Milnes, who was Stockton's city manager from 1991 to 2001, has been widely criticized for giving retirees full retirement healthcare in return for agreements from unions not to seek raises. The unfunded liability for those benefits is $417 million.

Milnes now represents the retirees in bankruptcy-related negotiations.

"It is not unfair to make changes in the retirement plan," Milnes said. "The world changes and when the world changes you have to adapt. But the question is, how do you change it in a way that is respectful of those most in need?"

Plaintiff Alfred Seibel, 58, a retired parks worker, said he can't afford the premiums and can't afford to lose coverage.
With the city's cuts, Seibel's health insurance costs would be $1,126.66 per month, or about 51% of his net income.

"I am already taking generic meds for cholesterol and triglycerides against my doctor's advice, I can't afford the $70 co-pay. My wife cries all the time. She don't understand how when they promise you all this stuff, then they [can] just take it away," he said in court documents.

A retired parks caretaker who worked for the city for 31 years, Seibel also suffers from a work-related herniated disc and enlarged lymph nodes that doctors say are from chemicals he used on the job.

The suit seeks class-action status covering all retirees, but Milnes said he and other managers with higher incomes would be willing to give up their benefits.

"The ones we're talking about are the ones who worked for us for years. For crying out loud, we know them, we know their families. We know about their breast cancer, their husband's diabetes," he said.

The budget the Stockton City Council adopted slashed contributions to current employee and retiree health benefits and eliminated benefits for employees with fewer than 10 years of city service. It eliminates city-funded medical benefits for retirees by July 2013.

There are about 2,400 city retirees, about 1,000 of whom receive health benefits. Two-thirds of the city retirees do not meet poverty requirements for California's low-income healthcare program but cannot afford private insurance, Milnes said. Those who are over 65 can get Medicare, but they must pay for medications and doctor's office visits.

Stockton Vice Mayor Kathy Miller said the lawsuit was not unexpected.

"All I can say is that there is a group of retirees who think it's more important for the taxpayers to pay 100% of their retirement than to keep police officers on the street," she said. "They know the situation. They know 80% of our discretionary income is for public safety. There is no way we can close the budget gap without these cuts. But they think they should come first."

ALSO:

Readers spread the blame in San Bernardino's bankruptcy bid

Katie Holmes-Tom Cruise divorce says who picks Suri's nannies

San Bernardino bankruptcy: Other California cities could be next

— Diana Marcum

Tuesday, June 12, 2012

CA: Pushing welfare recipients to work



LOS ANGELES (AP) — Gov. Jerry Brown wants to shift the safety net protecting California's most vulnerable residents pressured by a $16 billion budget deficit, the governor is proposing a major overhaul of the state's welfare-to-work program with the strategy of slashing people's benefits to motivate them to get jobs faster.

The move, if approved by the state Legislature as part of the 2012-13 budget package, would save $880 million, but beyond the savings, analysts say it represents a shift in the philosophy of how the Golden State helps its neediest residents.

"It's a reversal of the state's historic commitment to these families and children," said Scott Graves, senior policy analyst with the California Budget Project. "It's a very significant change."

California is the national leader in welfare recipients. About 3.8 percent of state residents were on welfare in 2010, the highest percentage in the country. In fact, California houses about a third of the nation's welfare recipients, while only housing one-eighth of the national population.

Most of the recipients, however, are children — more than three-quarters of the 1.5 million in the welfare-to-work program CalWORKs, which stands for California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids. The rest are mostly single mothers who must work or participate in job training and related activities to receive cash assistance.

The state has traditionally held a relatively generous attitude toward welfare. For instance, CalWORKs gives cash grants to children even when their parents are ineligible for benefits for various reasons, such as being illegal immigrants, receiving disability, or failing to abide by the program's rules. Only three other states — Indiana, Oregon and Arizona — have such an expansive policy.

California also allows parents to receive job services and cash grants for up to four years. Before last year, the limit was 60 months.

The policies have made the program an expensive budget line — the state spends $2.9 billion on CalWORKs and related programs — and an easy target for lawmakers looking for costs to trim with little political fallout. In years past, lawmakers have proposed doing away with benefits to children with ineligible parents and even slashing the whole CalWORKs program.

The state's budget woes have given renewed impetus to whittle away at CalWORKs. Last year, the maximum five-year benefit period shrunk to four years and monthly grants were diminished 8 percent. A family of three currently receives $638 a month, less than the rate in 1988.

For the next fiscal year, the governor is proposing more sweeping cutbacks, including a 27 percent cut in cash assistance to children with ineligible parents and further slashing the time limit for full benefits from four years to two years.

Other rule changes would restrict benefits to mothers of younger children and families earning poverty-level wages and increase sanctions on those who violate program terms.

"We felt the program was losing its focus of welfare-to-work," said Todd Bland, deputy director the state Department of Social Services' welfare-to-work division. "The reason we wanted to refocus is because of the very difficult budget environment."

The changes also come at a time when California is appealing federal penalties of $160 million because it failed to move enough welfare recipients to private sector jobs of at least 30 hours a week in 2008 and 2009, a requirement to receive federal money that helps pay for CalWORKs. Many California recipients are given part-time, publicly subsidized jobs so they get work experience.

CalWORKs recipients say getting a regular job that pays enough to support a family is not easy as lawmakers think.

Sarah Smith, a 31-year-old divorced mother of four in Los Angeles County, had been a stay-at-home mother since the age of 18, only working sporadically between having children. She was forced to turn to CalWORKs a year ago after her husband stopped paying child support. She received $850 a month in cash aid and $700 in food stamps.

She's also been able to make herself more marketable through the job services the program offers. She's beefed up her clerical skills, self-confidence and resume with a minimum-wage, temporary job as a customer service assistant with the county Department of Social Services, but the job ends this month.
She's hoping she now will be able to find a permanent job. If not, she will try for a subsidized job program where the county pays half her salary and the private employer pays the rest.

Policymakers don't realize that people need a chance to rebuild their lives, Smith said, adding that CalWORKs aid is far from enough to live on.
"It's still a juggling act," she said. "People are trying to get jobs. No one really wants to be on welfare. Most people are trying to get off it."

Nearly half of CalWORKs families move off the program within two years, but about 18 percent are long-term. Those families are often have very young children and headed by parents who lack a high school diploma or job skills, or have a family member with a disability, according to a report by the Public Policy Institute of California.

Brown's reforms aim to get parents off welfare before they become entrenched. The plan calls for parents to be hired or employable within two years of entering the program by providing job training and counseling, mental health, substance abuse and domestic violence support services, and child care. They must either work or participate in those activities to get the cash aid.

After two years, the services and some money would be cut off if they do not find a private sector job — a move that would affect about 130,000 parents, according to the state Legislative Analyst's Office.

Those parents could still receive a much-reduced cash benefit for child maintenance. A parent with two children would receive $375 a month, a drop of $263.

If parents do find employment, they could still be eligible to receive services such as child care for another two years and some cash aid if their income remains below a certain level.

Social service providers say it's overly optimistic to expect the private sector to absorb tens of thousands of people, many with minimal job skills, with California's unemployment rate the second highest in the nation at 10.9 percent in April. Only 11 percent of CalWORKs parents had private sector jobs of at least 30 hours week in 2009, according to the Public Policy Institute of California.

"CalWORKs recipients are living on a shoestring as it is," said Frank Mecca, executive director of the County Welfare Directors Association of California. "This is going to plunge many children into poverty and likely increase homelessness. You're shredding the safety net at a time when it's needed most."

Republicans say it's about time California pushed harder to get people to self-sufficiency, and say more is needed. Halving the time limit is a good move, but continuing to give parents cash for children with no strings attached defeats the purpose of welfare-to-work.

"It removes the responsibility from the parent. You're taking away the accountability from the oversight of the program," said Assemblyman Brian Jones, R-Santee, vice chairman of the Assembly Human Services Committee.

Instead of focusing on half measures of welfare reform, the governor should concentrate on job-stimulation strategies so people have a place to go, he said. "If there's no regulatory reform, he's wasting his time," Jones said.

The debate over CalWORKs' mission is likely to continue, especially if state revenues continue to fall short, said Caroline Danielson, policy fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California.

"The interest is in reorienting the program toward work," she said.

Contact the reporter http://twitter.com/ChristinaHoag.

Friday, April 27, 2012

California city on bankruptcy brink discovers illegal payouts to elected officials


A California city has been shelling out hundreds of thousands of dollars in illegal benefits to elected officials, even as the city considers bankruptcy.
The question is now whether the Stockton, Calif., council members who received the money -- totaling nearly $277,000 over more than 20 years -- plan on giving any of it back.
Mayor Ann Johnston told Fox40 in Sacramento that the city is weighing its options.
"We need to fix this. None of the council members or I had any idea that this was the situation," she said.
Fox40 reports that officials learned about the illegal enrollment in the state retirement system after a local newspaper columnist discovered the provision in the city charter and told the city attorney, who apparently determined the benefit was improper.
"At this point, I need to look at what the options are and if I have any choices or not," Johnston said.
But Ralph White, an ex-councilman, told Fox40 the options are simple.
"Weighing what options on what?" he asked. "Whether to give the money back, or keep it? Do you wanna be a thief, or does she wanna give the money back? That's the option."
Stockton has been considering bankruptcy while it attempts to balance its finances. Should Stockton take that step, it would mark the largest city bankruptcy in U.S. history.


Read more:

contact us by email: g.pitsch.85@gmail.com

Submit Domain Name

Submitdomainname.com

This Is Port City: Recent Posts

Taxes News Headlines - Yahoo! News