At First I Was Against This

I was sent an email concerning this training which is being provided at Dyess Air Force Base in Abilene, Texas, and at many other U.S. Military institutions.  The headlines are rather deceiving concerning what the training involves and what the cost is.  The 10K cost was presented in the email I received as $2,222.00 an hour.  That was a deceptive message.  Perhaps the cost should be weighed at cost per service member, and certainly the content as a whole should be considered rather than the indications that the title suggests...

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/04/13/pentagon-deploys-may-kiss-training/

I fired an impassioned email off after I read the email that was sent to me.  Serves me right that I embarrassed myself in my email, because I did not research the information that was sent me.  So tell me, what do you think of the training, considering the cost per Service Member, which is according to the number present at each session.  For instance at the Service Academies, each session could have as many as say a thousand people in attendance... so that would make the cost per Service Member under $2.50.  Sometimes how ideas are presented can be deceptive.

Words Worth Noting Concerning the Leadership of the World

Everywhere I look, the world is in turmoil.  I look at the video on the nightly news of little children pouring across the border of Mexico through Texas into my country, and I try to imagine what would compel me as a mother to send my child unaccompanied by an adult into another country where the message of that's country's government is "DO NOT COME, YOU WILL ONLY BE SENT BACK."

The U.S. Government Accountability Office, and How They Can Impact Your Life

The other day while Randy was home, we were out on the pond and Randy was rowing me around, Patti jumped in and paddled for her life chasing the canoe all around the pond.  No amount of urging would send her back to the bank, and of course trying to pull her in with us would just have resulted in turning over the canoe, and throwing us all in the frigid water.  The temperature was about 45 or so, and the water was freezing, yet Patti would not give up, no matter how she shivered and shook.  Sometimes there are things you should not give up on, no matter how hard they are.

If you are unfamiliar with the U.S. Government Accountability Office , you should make yourself familiar with them.  This organization is one set up to monitor how our tax dollars are used, whether or not honesty and fairness operates in every facet of our government, and based upon the premise that these goals are attainable, and in fact our government, and those serving in it can be held accountable.   Here is a link to their site, you also can follow them on facebook and other social media sites:

My daughter had encountered a government employee who was abusing her position with seemingly no fear of ever being called to accountability for doing so, in the Abilene, Texas Social Security Administration Office.  That always suggests to me that the person has long gotten away with abuse of their position, and the true problem actually exists within the leadership of the organization.  

I had been amazed by the audacity with which the individual disregarded the Social Security Administration's written guidance on a matter, indicating complete confidence by the individual that she would never have to answer for doing so, and confidence that my daughter was too uninformed and intimidated by her to do anything about it.  This employee of the Social Security Administration made wild statements, absurd demands, which changed daily, and threatened my daughter each time she spoke to her.  I kept advising my daughter to require the woman to communicate these requirements in writing, as I knew the employee would never dare to do, due to the illegality of their content.

The fact that no one in our family had any contact or knew this woman previous to our family member's contact with her was clear, so there could be no personal motivations in her behavior, and that just furthered my awe at the situation.  The demeaning way in which my daughter was treated was another facet of this "government encounter" that raised my hackles.  It was so much like the V.A. encounters so many Soldiers have described to me.  As patriots and true believers in all our country was founded upon, we must each fulfill our own obligations every time we encounter any behavior which might possibly indicate corruption in any of our government agencies.  The greatest deterrent to this type of activity, is swiftly acting discipline of those caught participating in such crime.

After I posted to the U.S. Government Accountability Office that I had a complaint, and was seeking recourse, and it was made known to the SSA office in Abilene, within 12 hours a check was cut, and all was ironed out.  So, for future reference, make note of this office, and never just assume because it is a Federal Government office that any entity can get away with anything they want to, and that you as an individual are helpless before them.  Our government exists to serve our people, and it can be held accountable down to the individual offender.  It is the responsibility of every American to never throw up our hands, look the other way, or fail to make a stand in the face of wrong doing.  The individuals who make their way into the system and corrupt our government processes can and should be held accountable.  

While the check is on the way to my daughter, I am not through with this situation.  Until I know why this situation happened, and exactly who is committing the wrong doing, I am not going to let it go.  There will be others who encounter the same behavior after my daughter, there were those who encountered the same behavior before my daughter, and a stand must be made to weed out the offending employees, and the supervisory personnel who have allowed this behavior.  We can't just turn and walk away because our loved one has now been treated fairly.  We owe an obligation to our country, and to those citizens we share it with.  So, the collecting of facts and the presentation of those facts will continue, until we receive assurance this pocket of what we are convinced is corruption, is dealt with.  Dealt with to the point that all dealing with the office where the corruption originated, can be sure that it has been rid of the offenders who perpetrated this wrong doing.  To quote Isaiah, "I have set my face like flint."

I Love Buying Christmas Presents, and I Hate Fraud Waste and Abuse in Government Offices

I got my daughter Meredith three little tables for Christmas, a coffee table, and two end tables.  She wants to get an apartment for the first time in her life.  She has had a seizure disorder since birth, it was diagnosed by Dr. Brown, a pediatric neurologist in Lubbock, Texas as Second Decade Onset, Hereditary Epilepsy.  She suffered a near drowning when she was fourteen, when she had her first grand mal seizure.  She has tried many times to work, but she is always fired for some reason.  These firings alway occur right after she has a seizure at work and falls.  Of course it is against the law to fire someone who has a handicapping condition... but then a lot of things are against the law.

I am writing two blog posts specifically for the U.S. Government Accountability Office.  They are the story of what has happened to my daughter at the hands of  the Social Security Administration office in Abilene, Texas, and more specifically at the hands of the specialist who has handled Meredith's case, Ms. Alicia Flores, and her supervisor, David.  

My daughter was first approved for Social Security benefits in September in a court hearing in front of a judge and five committee members.  She has been applying for benefits for many years, and was  turned down repeatedly.  Finally she received the judgment deeming her qualified.  She then was given a case worker from the Abilene Social Security Administration office named Alicia Flores.

At first Ms. Flores told my daughter she had to have income information from her father, and from her boyfriend.  That didn't sound right to either one of them.  My daughter lives with her father, and so does her boyfriend.  Her boyfriend pays room and board for his one third of the cost of the household.  When Meredth had moved in, her dad had said they would split the cost of household, and she could pay him  the incurred expenses when she received her social security benefits.  I cannot believe that Ms. Flores didn't have access to the Code of Federal Regulations, and the following informaton taken from Section 416.1165.  Oddly enough, after her father wrote a letter stating that Meredith had promised to pay him back room and board fees once she began receiving benefits, that requirement was dropped.  However, as I read this regulation it should have never been requested.

Deeming of Income

§ 416.1160. What is deeming of income?

(a) General. We use the term deeming to identify the process of considering another person's income to be your own. When the deeming rules apply, it does not matter whether the income of the other person is actually available to you. We must apply these rules anyway. There are four categories of individuals whose income may be deemed to you.

§ 416.1165. How we deem income to you from your ineligible parent(s).

 ( 7) You attain age 18. In the month following the month in which you attain age 18 and thereafter, we do not deem your ineligible parent's income to you to determine your eligibility for SSI benefits. In determining your benefit amount beginning with the month following your attainment of age 18, we only use your own countable income in a prior month, excluding any income deemed to you in that month from your ineligible parent (see § 416.1160(b)(2)(B)). Your income for the current and subsequent months must include any income in the form of cash or in-kind support and maintenance provided by your parents.

Meredith's boyfriend has always been charged room and board for himself by her father since he moved in, and he and her father both feel that the request of this information is an invasion of their privacy, and completely unrelated to Meredith's benefits status.  Quiet frankly, I think it is an illegal invasion of privacy.   Meredith's boyfriend took very serious exception to the request for his income information, as he and Meredith DO NOT present themselves to the community as married, never have, and aren't at this point in their relationship ready to make a marriage committment.  When Meredith advised Ms. Flores that the boyfriend refused to give his income information, and asked Ms. Flores how she proposed that she was supposed to get that information, Ms. Flores offered no suggestions. 

Ms. Flores has been out of her office for a great deal of the time since my daughter sent in a requested form stating that her boyfriend refused to turn over his income information, as he and Meredith are both uncertain as to whether they wish to marry or not, and certainly do not hold themselves out to the community as married, and never have.  In each conversation with Ms. Flores, Meredith has been threatened by Ms. Flores, with her stating to Meredith, "it is against the law to lie to the government."  Meredith keeps telling her, "I understand that, and have never had any intention of lying to the government, as I am an honest person."  I don't understand why Ms. Flores has the right to accuse my daughter of dishonesty.  As of her latest advisement, Ms. Flores stated to my daughter in a phone conversation on the 13th of December that Meredith would not receive her back pay, and that all paychecks due her from here forward, would be held until her boyfriend moved out of the household.  Since when did our government assume such control and power over the lives of its' citizens?

This demand for her boyfriend's income information kind of odd in the first place as there is clear advisement from the Social Security Administration's governing policy that clearly addresses this issue.  When Meredith spoke to Ms. Flores' superviso,r David, earlier last week, he advised Meredith that according to her case file, she had told Ms. Flores that she was married in a phone conversation on November 12th.  That is a plain flat out lie on either Ms. Flores' part, or her supervisor David's part.  Further, her supervisor, David advised Meredith that her Ms. Flores had deemed her ineligible for benefits, based on her husband's income.  See that is the odd part... if Ms. Flores already has Meredith's  boyfriend's income information, how did she get it, and why is she demanding that Meredith get it from him.  The following is the information I found online concerning the policies of the Social Security Administration on this subject.

§ 416.1160. What is deeming of income?

(a.)

(1) Ineligible spouse. If you live in the same household with your ineligible spouse, we look at your spouse's income to decide whether we must deem some of it to you. We do this because we expect your spouse to use some of his or her income to take care of some of your needs.

In an Issue Paper by the Social Security Administration the following guidance is issued:

No. 2003-01

December 2003

Treatment of Married Couples

in the SSI Program

The Social Security Act defines the rules for determin-

ing marital relationships for SSI recipients. Appropri-

ate state law is applied in determining whether a man

and a woman are married, except that if a man and

woman have been considered as husband and wife for

purposes of Social Security benefits, they are also

considered married for purposes of SSI.

2

The act also requires that if a man and a woman

are found to be “holding out”—that is, presenting

themselves to the community as husband and wife—

they should be considered married for purposes of the

SSI program. An example of such a relationship is

one in which the couple are not legally married but

consider themselves as being in a common-law

marriage. If a member of the couple denies holding

out but evidence exists to the contrary, both individuals

must complete a questionnaire gathering information

about bills, mail, and housing arrangements.

Some advocates regard this procedure as administratively

burdensome and as infringing on personal privacy.

Such concerns have resulted in recommendations to

eliminate the concept of holding out and to treat as

spouses only those individuals who are legally married

(see, for example, Social Security Administration

1992).

I read and understand what I read as well as the next person, and based on the  above information, I wish to make a complaint to the U.S. Government Accountability Office concerning the practices of the employees of the Abilene, Texas Social Security Administration Office  My daughter's experience has been to be at the mercy of abuse of power and fraud by Ms. Alicia Flores and her supervisor.  I have no way of knowing what motivates either of these persons.   At this time I am formally making complaint to the GAO, and asking for an audit and investigation of the Abilene Texas Social Security Office. I am emailing a copy of this post to the email address listed on the GAO web site,   contact@gao.gov