Noticed on Yahoo’s listing of green jobs the most desirable pays are told as yearly rates as $90,670 a year. Even in greens the lowliest drudgery jobs are told in terms of say $7.50 to $10.00 a hour. I guess even the employers do not want you to know that you will be making under $25,000 a year.
I guess Under $25,000 is not the bait, you want to use when trying to snag the cream of the cream. So you boast of an hourly pay, which is above starvation rates of $8.50 an hour.
Looking at regular jobs, this is the practice, not the exception. Then, looking through the State employment data base, I found most of the listed jobs start at $10.00 and under.
If you use logic and HUD's fair-market rent values, one needs to make $15.57 an hour for 40 hours to pay the rent. That means you live in sub-standard housing, or cannot pay the rent. Even at $10.00 an hour instead of $15.57 it can take two full weeks or more of income to pay for a two bedroom apartment. Then you have taxes removed before you see them.
Every one needs to be working at the advertised yearly rates of even $40,000 a year. All jobs should be advertised by the yearly income. And workers should only have to toil one week to pay there rent.
This means either rents go down, or salaries come up. Look at your own job listings. Are jobs over $35,000 a year posted by the yearly rates? Are $10 and under, jobs posted by the hourly wage? This is an indicator of unfair pay.
If people did not do office and bathroom cleaning, executives would not want to do their jobs. So in fact that job is worth $20 dollars an hour. While educated people, as nurses get the purchasing power of $45 an hour.
I know of only one land who said, you have a low income so this apartment is $550 a month rather than $625. It can happen but usually the sounds issuing forth off most landlords lips am "I have to pay my insurance and other bills. The price is as I advertised. If you do not take it at that price someone else will."
This is a Humpty Dumpty world were 70% of workers are paid less the rent. Equality and decent pay goes together. It would mean a change in our economy.
But after more than 2,010 years it’s about time, everyone working disabled and stay at home mothers.
For Mom and Pop employers the government will compensate the difference.
By paying a decent wage, taxes for most aid, not covering the full need will be saved. Aid will seldom be required. Human dignity will be respected. Workers will be joyously more productive. Employers will also benefit.
Employers will benefit, on their taxes, because with a truly livable wage, social services program will seldom be required. People will be told, through deed they are of value. So it will follow, that ALL LIFE IS OF VALUE. With well paying jobs, both violence and human suffering will end. In the long run money will be saved.
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Criminalizing fires caused by lighting with candles
Lewiston Maine. This past year, Lewiston had two house fires due to lighting by candles. A seven year old girl died. No we are not talking about a romantic dinner. The families electricity, been cut off due to lack of payment. They were lighting by candles
A Lawmaker decides she knows the way to fix the situation. She will pass a law telling the landlord his tenants are in a financial bad time. Due to their inability to pay bills they might be putting his property at risk of burning.
This compassionate lawmaker is hosting a bill to inform landlords of the tenants default on paying their electric bills. I think with the idea the land owner will pay the bill and tact the cost onto his sum of income. The TV News took this opportunity a chance to focus on the proposed law. The news touched upon the fact this might break the privacy of the renter.
But beyond that fact, is that evening with the most caring landlord, he or she would be placing their earning at risk by paying the renters electric. The easiest course is to evict the family. This would place individuals and families at risk of homelessness.
This bill does not address the CAUSE of the family being unable to cover the full cost of one of the basics of life. Which simply is the family is extremely underpaid.
Nor does the bill, require programs already in place to aid by paying enough of the electric bill to keep the electricity on. But the news story mentioned the last hope of help General Assistance, as a means of overcoming ones lack. Two thirds who apply are denied, even through they qualify fr the aid. So why should landlords be any kinder then people who transpose state laws?
There is gentlemen's pact entry level employment will not pay more than $8.50 an hour. Factories and unionized worker have a different income limit that, most producers abide by. The pact is way under the amount required to pay all one bills.
To pay all ones bills in a month a Maine think tank decided it would cost $17.40 an hour. If that figure is examined in comparison to what HUD says is required to pay the rent, some where around $15.59 an hour, the think tanks number, seems to be a low estimation.
A person working 40 hours a week would have about $2.00 an hour or $80 dollars a week, before taxes to live on. That is barely enough to buy food for two people. Bit bet you with Uncle Sam's cut , the person would be lucky to have half of that amount left.
What if this law would did past? Would it criminalize the low paying employers? No it would criminalize the poorly paid. Maine employers routinely pay under the Livable wage to 70% of all of Maine employee's. And this is representative of the USA. Notifying the landlord of the renters inability to pay, is the not the core problem.
Having a job paying livable wage, is. One out of three flipping burgers are over 24 years of age. Employers should be ashamed of their pact, to pay less than the needs. While it would be in the land owner's best interest to pay the electric, in the long run. He would then have wait to be reimbursed. So even through house fires or fatal house fire result in 2 of 1,000 people without electric but all could be penalized.
A renter having electrical power cut, would turn into a reason to evict. That would be the simplest of steps in the landlords own self interest.
If this lawmaker wanted to aid the poor, the best avenue would be to talk with the poor ourselves. We Know the Solutions. The poor would say better pay, and more purchasing power, is the best way, to overcome this problem. No child, or adults should die in house fires. If pays were adequate, the Utilities would be paid. Its a late millionaire saying this, not just us poor. There should be no working poor. The poor knows this.
If news were in-depth, the problems would be fixed.
A Lawmaker decides she knows the way to fix the situation. She will pass a law telling the landlord his tenants are in a financial bad time. Due to their inability to pay bills they might be putting his property at risk of burning.
This compassionate lawmaker is hosting a bill to inform landlords of the tenants default on paying their electric bills. I think with the idea the land owner will pay the bill and tact the cost onto his sum of income. The TV News took this opportunity a chance to focus on the proposed law. The news touched upon the fact this might break the privacy of the renter.
But beyond that fact, is that evening with the most caring landlord, he or she would be placing their earning at risk by paying the renters electric. The easiest course is to evict the family. This would place individuals and families at risk of homelessness.
This bill does not address the CAUSE of the family being unable to cover the full cost of one of the basics of life. Which simply is the family is extremely underpaid.
Nor does the bill, require programs already in place to aid by paying enough of the electric bill to keep the electricity on. But the news story mentioned the last hope of help General Assistance, as a means of overcoming ones lack. Two thirds who apply are denied, even through they qualify fr the aid. So why should landlords be any kinder then people who transpose state laws?
There is gentlemen's pact entry level employment will not pay more than $8.50 an hour. Factories and unionized worker have a different income limit that, most producers abide by. The pact is way under the amount required to pay all one bills.
To pay all ones bills in a month a Maine think tank decided it would cost $17.40 an hour. If that figure is examined in comparison to what HUD says is required to pay the rent, some where around $15.59 an hour, the think tanks number, seems to be a low estimation.
A person working 40 hours a week would have about $2.00 an hour or $80 dollars a week, before taxes to live on. That is barely enough to buy food for two people. Bit bet you with Uncle Sam's cut , the person would be lucky to have half of that amount left.
What if this law would did past? Would it criminalize the low paying employers? No it would criminalize the poorly paid. Maine employers routinely pay under the Livable wage to 70% of all of Maine employee's. And this is representative of the USA. Notifying the landlord of the renters inability to pay, is the not the core problem.
Having a job paying livable wage, is. One out of three flipping burgers are over 24 years of age. Employers should be ashamed of their pact, to pay less than the needs. While it would be in the land owner's best interest to pay the electric, in the long run. He would then have wait to be reimbursed. So even through house fires or fatal house fire result in 2 of 1,000 people without electric but all could be penalized.
A renter having electrical power cut, would turn into a reason to evict. That would be the simplest of steps in the landlords own self interest.
If this lawmaker wanted to aid the poor, the best avenue would be to talk with the poor ourselves. We Know the Solutions. The poor would say better pay, and more purchasing power, is the best way, to overcome this problem. No child, or adults should die in house fires. If pays were adequate, the Utilities would be paid. Its a late millionaire saying this, not just us poor. There should be no working poor. The poor knows this.
If news were in-depth, the problems would be fixed.
Monday, January 25, 2010
State Lawmaker does NOT Know Civil Law Means NO Appointed Lawyer
A state lawmaker wrote back to a friend of mine that he thought lawyers were sopplied in both criminal and civil court cases. I polished what I write him.
Here is what I wrote, it could stand yet another coat of polish.
I am a bit surprised, and worried that lawmakers, who knows not the difference of criminal and civil matters of the courts. The Court appointed lawyer's, are ONLY for criminal matters. Even through Civil matter can take away money, and enjoyment of life.
CIVIL Matters as, foreclosures, driving licenses, evictions, Accident, insurance, big corporations over charging, etc. are often handled without Lawyers. In 2010 there are about 7 Pine tree lawyers for all of Maine, for the 225,000+ people who qualify.
In 1997 Maine's blue ribbon commission found about 83 % of Civil matters went unaddressed. What happen was in Maine, the number of Pine Tree Legal Association, Lawyers gets cut back?. Injustice Grows like a weed.
There was movement in 07' to get a Gideon law for Civil matters, lawyers for people who qualify for aid with civil matters as evictions. It failed. It was named after the guy who proved he should have a lawyer for criminal stuff.
In the 1960's Courts actually Heard facts of cases, in 2010 they do not. The courts get by on pretense of laws, Summary judgement- means before hearing the facts, or without a trial.
So that leaves Everyone who makes under $50,303 a year median income is usually un- or under -represented. As $10.00 an hour is considered good wages in Maine. Civil Law can cost tens of thousands of dollars. If can affect the quality of living. Loss of license, puts the poor in a virtual jail sentence.
It is also for the sake of justice that this case law which saves time for the Court, at the cost of justice, must be ruled unconstitutional. The Courts musst streamline, but not at the cost of justice for the poor.
When the poor are held to as high or in a few cases higher standards then a 15 year seasoned lawyer in procedural Rules of Courts matters as crossing T's and dotting I's justice is denied to both the poor, or those exercising their constitutional rights.
This phrase in case law ,"So the un-represented party will not benefit from their lack of lawyer" On its face it seems innocuous. But used on procedures of the courts it hold the pro-se or non lawyer party to standard they Can have no awareness of in their daily eking out a living. It is damning.
Even someone who has read the rules of Maine's courts has less of an understanding then a graduating student of law.
It has been a long time resolved, going back thousands of years that black smiths, farmers factory workers and store clerks, should not be hindered by technicalities of law. Yet, this pretense of law has been with us since 1977.
In practice lawyers who failed to appear has their cases automatically re-docketed. Or placed back on the schedule. Cases from attorneys who missed a court date even due to a vacation, are placed back on the court schedule. So the people who pays the attorneys fees, are not harmed by their lawyers actions. If the lawyer went out and got drunk, he might not be able to act as their lawyer but upon finding another lawyer the case will be re-instated.This reinstating occurs so the lawyer can make a living, from law.
Basically I saw things like Denying the Indigent, the right to file in formus paupiers or with out filing fee is outrageous. Dismissing a case because a written answer or affirmative defense was not filed in 20 days, in the accepted format, is to deny a day in Court yet this happens through out or supposed "Land of Laws."
Fathers are told they must include a citation of case law in their argument. Mothers are told they must retrieve a fee of about $49,000 called a bond to bring the matter to appeal. Parties who represent themselves are denied re-installment of case due to sickness. It it wrong to hold the defendant to a higher standard of competency then a 15 year in practice lawyer.
It is wrong to deny use of an impartial court, to those who make under the median income. AFDC Mothers in Maine make $5,000 a year or under. SSI disabled average under 7,500. Those at minimum wage about $12,000 depending upon hours. How is one suppose to afford a lawyer to fight car accidents, and big corporations charging on an identity fraud, when it cost more than 1/10 of yearly income for any of these people? Paying a $1,500 retainer for a civil matter from these meager incomes, often, can not happen. This inhumane case law needs to be exposed and corrected.
Even for criminal cases, the appointed lawyer who gets $60 an hour is Not going to work as hard as they work for someone who can pay $200 an hour. This denies justice to the poor.
Civil cases can effect nearly as bad as can Criminal cases, as in removal of driving license turning one in a prisoner in their home. That is if they obey the illegal and unconstitutional court order.
I will ask you the same as I asked Maine Supreme Court, Would you want your loved ones to have a bar upon their use of the courts bases on technicalities? It does not make sense to hold Non-Lawyers, working hard in areas, other than law, to the proficiency as School Taught Lawyers.
In reality many cases concerning the poor do not get the facts of the cases heard. This is NOT a "Land of Laws". Its a "Land of Barriers for the poor". The 30% who can afford lawyers are treated differently than the 70% who can not. This is WRONG!! It is Unconstitutional.
I took time to write this so you, a lawmaker knows, the difference between Criminal action and civil. This injustice can no longer be allowed to prevail. I guess in order to do so we have to educate lawmakers that civil matters, can impact the quality or amount of food we the poor eat. The life we live, if we are paying for someone Else's caused accident. And this injustice would be due to the case was decided on technicalities rather then the facts of the case. We are No Longer a Land of Liberty. In fact America is THE LAND OF HIDDEN TECHNICALITIES.
Here is what I wrote, it could stand yet another coat of polish.
I am a bit surprised, and worried that lawmakers, who knows not the difference of criminal and civil matters of the courts. The Court appointed lawyer's, are ONLY for criminal matters. Even through Civil matter can take away money, and enjoyment of life.
CIVIL Matters as, foreclosures, driving licenses, evictions, Accident, insurance, big corporations over charging, etc. are often handled without Lawyers. In 2010 there are about 7 Pine tree lawyers for all of Maine, for the 225,000+ people who qualify.
In 1997 Maine's blue ribbon commission found about 83 % of Civil matters went unaddressed. What happen was in Maine, the number of Pine Tree Legal Association, Lawyers gets cut back?. Injustice Grows like a weed.
There was movement in 07' to get a Gideon law for Civil matters, lawyers for people who qualify for aid with civil matters as evictions. It failed. It was named after the guy who proved he should have a lawyer for criminal stuff.
In the 1960's Courts actually Heard facts of cases, in 2010 they do not. The courts get by on pretense of laws, Summary judgement- means before hearing the facts, or without a trial.
So that leaves Everyone who makes under $50,303 a year median income is usually un- or under -represented. As $10.00 an hour is considered good wages in Maine. Civil Law can cost tens of thousands of dollars. If can affect the quality of living. Loss of license, puts the poor in a virtual jail sentence.
It is also for the sake of justice that this case law which saves time for the Court, at the cost of justice, must be ruled unconstitutional. The Courts musst streamline, but not at the cost of justice for the poor.
When the poor are held to as high or in a few cases higher standards then a 15 year seasoned lawyer in procedural Rules of Courts matters as crossing T's and dotting I's justice is denied to both the poor, or those exercising their constitutional rights.
This phrase in case law ,"So the un-represented party will not benefit from their lack of lawyer" On its face it seems innocuous. But used on procedures of the courts it hold the pro-se or non lawyer party to standard they Can have no awareness of in their daily eking out a living. It is damning.
Even someone who has read the rules of Maine's courts has less of an understanding then a graduating student of law.
It has been a long time resolved, going back thousands of years that black smiths, farmers factory workers and store clerks, should not be hindered by technicalities of law. Yet, this pretense of law has been with us since 1977.
In practice lawyers who failed to appear has their cases automatically re-docketed. Or placed back on the schedule. Cases from attorneys who missed a court date even due to a vacation, are placed back on the court schedule. So the people who pays the attorneys fees, are not harmed by their lawyers actions. If the lawyer went out and got drunk, he might not be able to act as their lawyer but upon finding another lawyer the case will be re-instated.This reinstating occurs so the lawyer can make a living, from law.
Basically I saw things like Denying the Indigent, the right to file in formus paupiers or with out filing fee is outrageous. Dismissing a case because a written answer or affirmative defense was not filed in 20 days, in the accepted format, is to deny a day in Court yet this happens through out or supposed "Land of Laws."
Fathers are told they must include a citation of case law in their argument. Mothers are told they must retrieve a fee of about $49,000 called a bond to bring the matter to appeal. Parties who represent themselves are denied re-installment of case due to sickness. It it wrong to hold the defendant to a higher standard of competency then a 15 year in practice lawyer.
It is wrong to deny use of an impartial court, to those who make under the median income. AFDC Mothers in Maine make $5,000 a year or under. SSI disabled average under 7,500. Those at minimum wage about $12,000 depending upon hours. How is one suppose to afford a lawyer to fight car accidents, and big corporations charging on an identity fraud, when it cost more than 1/10 of yearly income for any of these people? Paying a $1,500 retainer for a civil matter from these meager incomes, often, can not happen. This inhumane case law needs to be exposed and corrected.
Even for criminal cases, the appointed lawyer who gets $60 an hour is Not going to work as hard as they work for someone who can pay $200 an hour. This denies justice to the poor.
Civil cases can effect nearly as bad as can Criminal cases, as in removal of driving license turning one in a prisoner in their home. That is if they obey the illegal and unconstitutional court order.
I will ask you the same as I asked Maine Supreme Court, Would you want your loved ones to have a bar upon their use of the courts bases on technicalities? It does not make sense to hold Non-Lawyers, working hard in areas, other than law, to the proficiency as School Taught Lawyers.
In reality many cases concerning the poor do not get the facts of the cases heard. This is NOT a "Land of Laws". Its a "Land of Barriers for the poor". The 30% who can afford lawyers are treated differently than the 70% who can not. This is WRONG!! It is Unconstitutional.
I took time to write this so you, a lawmaker knows, the difference between Criminal action and civil. This injustice can no longer be allowed to prevail. I guess in order to do so we have to educate lawmakers that civil matters, can impact the quality or amount of food we the poor eat. The life we live, if we are paying for someone Else's caused accident. And this injustice would be due to the case was decided on technicalities rather then the facts of the case. We are No Longer a Land of Liberty. In fact America is THE LAND OF HIDDEN TECHNICALITIES.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
JUST FOLLOW THE BLUE PRINT
About, 2, 000 year ago a wise man laid out the blue print on ending poverty. When asked how much do we give to the poor? Christ said "the Full Need." This means we ask the Poor what they need. The answer will be to be paid an adequate wage, even if we are flipping burgers. Human Kind has never tried to follow that blue print.
Us humans have the solution to end poverty. What we lack is the ambition, we lack the feeling we can accomplish this goal. Of knowing this goal is doable.
In the late 1950’s American leaders were determined to build a inter continental highway. We built it from point A to point C. We did not stop at point B and expect the Route 95 highway, without out any tools, or materials to magically build itself from Philly to Maine.
But somehow this seems to be a sensible solution to ending poverty? Personally, as someone of poverty, working with others in financial lack this seems as insane as repeatedly, hitting ones thumb with a hammer, giving the thumb time to heal, then not excepting it to hurt on the 50th try. And it seem just as fruitful, as giving a welfare moth 1/3 of the rent cost then exclaiming that she is a lair and thief, when she finds the other 2/3 plus money required to do that.
According to experts it will cost 0.02% of the world wealth to eradicate world wide poverty. That is a tiny number. We only have to believe end human lack is a doable task. Then, we need to reroute the buying power to every person on earth. Millionaires of any moral standing will not much miss the insignificant amount from their huge paychecks. They we see a better society, with less violence.
This will happen when enough humans aspire to ending 100% of poverty. When people are willing to give the full need to the poor, it will end the nightmare of poverty. Just as building a bridge half way to a destination and expecting it to build its self doesn’t work. We need to give 70% of Americans the full need or a livable wage. We need to follow the old blueprint, to share adequately.
Yes so the Millionaire or Billionaire, only has 7 houses across this world instead of 8. The Billionaire will not miss that extra house, as much as 10,000 some-ones with no house, no apartment misses their safety, their humanity. The Blue- print simply says to pay every worker, all the disabled, and single parent enough to pay their monthly bills.
Many kind hearted persons, already thinks this compassionate way is followed, but it IS NOT. We must make into reality, this wise blueprint. Giving to the full need will end the specter of poverty.
Us humans have the solution to end poverty. What we lack is the ambition, we lack the feeling we can accomplish this goal. Of knowing this goal is doable.
In the late 1950’s American leaders were determined to build a inter continental highway. We built it from point A to point C. We did not stop at point B and expect the Route 95 highway, without out any tools, or materials to magically build itself from Philly to Maine.
But somehow this seems to be a sensible solution to ending poverty? Personally, as someone of poverty, working with others in financial lack this seems as insane as repeatedly, hitting ones thumb with a hammer, giving the thumb time to heal, then not excepting it to hurt on the 50th try. And it seem just as fruitful, as giving a welfare moth 1/3 of the rent cost then exclaiming that she is a lair and thief, when she finds the other 2/3 plus money required to do that.
According to experts it will cost 0.02% of the world wealth to eradicate world wide poverty. That is a tiny number. We only have to believe end human lack is a doable task. Then, we need to reroute the buying power to every person on earth. Millionaires of any moral standing will not much miss the insignificant amount from their huge paychecks. They we see a better society, with less violence.
This will happen when enough humans aspire to ending 100% of poverty. When people are willing to give the full need to the poor, it will end the nightmare of poverty. Just as building a bridge half way to a destination and expecting it to build its self doesn’t work. We need to give 70% of Americans the full need or a livable wage. We need to follow the old blueprint, to share adequately.
Yes so the Millionaire or Billionaire, only has 7 houses across this world instead of 8. The Billionaire will not miss that extra house, as much as 10,000 some-ones with no house, no apartment misses their safety, their humanity. The Blue- print simply says to pay every worker, all the disabled, and single parent enough to pay their monthly bills.
Many kind hearted persons, already thinks this compassionate way is followed, but it IS NOT. We must make into reality, this wise blueprint. Giving to the full need will end the specter of poverty.
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Fixing America, One State at a Time
Commentary :: Civil & Human Rights
Fixing America,One State at a Time
Jan lightfootLane
Fixing America,One State at a Time
How many people must know about an injustice to the poor, before it is fixed?
Fixing America. Some people say the personal is political. Some people also say it is time to examine hometown governmental abuse.
If 50 people know how broken our so called safety net system was, it would stay without hope of being revamped. If just 1,000 persons knew that towns send away those who are in fact eligible for town aid or General Assistance(GA), there might raise a clamor to fix the devastated practice.
GA is suppose to help with lives basics heating rent food etc., to anyone with or without kids, whose income or lack their of qualifies them. It is called the program of last hope. It is based on state laws.
Too often those trusted officials applying state laws and towns ordinances size up those who ask for aid. The meek, those who stutters, or show other weakest, are declined the aid, they are QUALIFIED to receive according to state laws. The state law says “Anyone wishing to live in any town is to be considered a resident.
Local law or ordinances can compliment state law. It cannot legally contradict state law. Yet people are told by trusted public officials “If you are new in town, or have not lived there a year, You are not officially a resident.” This is made up, or whim-ful law. It is blatantly unconstitutional.Most people believe officials apply governmental programs fairly and compassionately. Such is not the case.
Disability lawyers find when a SSI denied claim, is appealed 50% of the cases win. But lawyers do not see Profit in going after the State or town when a “Mistake” is made in GA.
That is what the overseeing body of the Dept of Health and Human Service calls what appears as an intentional denial, of GA. “Bad training” The Dept. is one of the trainers. Perhaps Maine and all New England states need to pay lawyers fees from the towns themselves when they win a clients case in court. After all 30 years ago there were no disability lawyers, then they learnt they could have 1/3 of the clients back payments. And a line of disability lawyers pop up.
Perhaps that is what is required to make GA More fairly applied. That the poor can hire lawyers and the attorneys will get twice the amount the client wins. That could make town’s cities and villages more apt to fairly apply the law to all.
This would mean saving of taxpayer’s dollars in the long run. Preventing displacement saves 10 times+ the amount, that a preventable eviction costs. With just the population of a small city say 30,000 people their would not be just a clamor, there would be an out - cry for improvement.
Laws must be enforceable, before they mean anything. Lawyers are the people who will enforce the laws. Knowing the poor, can hire lawyers the towns will be more likely to fairly apply state laws rather than change them.Most people care about others, or at least saving money in the long run. The laws would evolve. Society would be uplifted.
Yet no Maine mainstream newspaper’s, wants their readers to know about this happening. Why? One reason is fear that it would upset their advertiser’s apple carts. The media does not look to the long term of everyone having more income means people can spend more, just to the short-term upheaval.It is a Human Right to have laws fairly applied.
Fixing America,One State at a Time
Jan lightfootLane
Fixing America,One State at a Time
How many people must know about an injustice to the poor, before it is fixed?
Fixing America. Some people say the personal is political. Some people also say it is time to examine hometown governmental abuse.
If 50 people know how broken our so called safety net system was, it would stay without hope of being revamped. If just 1,000 persons knew that towns send away those who are in fact eligible for town aid or General Assistance(GA), there might raise a clamor to fix the devastated practice.
GA is suppose to help with lives basics heating rent food etc., to anyone with or without kids, whose income or lack their of qualifies them. It is called the program of last hope. It is based on state laws.
Too often those trusted officials applying state laws and towns ordinances size up those who ask for aid. The meek, those who stutters, or show other weakest, are declined the aid, they are QUALIFIED to receive according to state laws. The state law says “Anyone wishing to live in any town is to be considered a resident.
Local law or ordinances can compliment state law. It cannot legally contradict state law. Yet people are told by trusted public officials “If you are new in town, or have not lived there a year, You are not officially a resident.” This is made up, or whim-ful law. It is blatantly unconstitutional.Most people believe officials apply governmental programs fairly and compassionately. Such is not the case.
Disability lawyers find when a SSI denied claim, is appealed 50% of the cases win. But lawyers do not see Profit in going after the State or town when a “Mistake” is made in GA.
That is what the overseeing body of the Dept of Health and Human Service calls what appears as an intentional denial, of GA. “Bad training” The Dept. is one of the trainers. Perhaps Maine and all New England states need to pay lawyers fees from the towns themselves when they win a clients case in court. After all 30 years ago there were no disability lawyers, then they learnt they could have 1/3 of the clients back payments. And a line of disability lawyers pop up.
Perhaps that is what is required to make GA More fairly applied. That the poor can hire lawyers and the attorneys will get twice the amount the client wins. That could make town’s cities and villages more apt to fairly apply the law to all.
This would mean saving of taxpayer’s dollars in the long run. Preventing displacement saves 10 times+ the amount, that a preventable eviction costs. With just the population of a small city say 30,000 people their would not be just a clamor, there would be an out - cry for improvement.
Laws must be enforceable, before they mean anything. Lawyers are the people who will enforce the laws. Knowing the poor, can hire lawyers the towns will be more likely to fairly apply state laws rather than change them.Most people care about others, or at least saving money in the long run. The laws would evolve. Society would be uplifted.
Yet no Maine mainstream newspaper’s, wants their readers to know about this happening. Why? One reason is fear that it would upset their advertiser’s apple carts. The media does not look to the long term of everyone having more income means people can spend more, just to the short-term upheaval.It is a Human Right to have laws fairly applied.
Monday, December 21, 2009
David Lacking Ammio
DAVID vs Goliath - The Courts Hands David
A Badly Torn and Empty Slingshot.
By Jan LightfootLane 207/453-2353
Denial of "Meaningful Access to American Courts" means, Americans are less Free, than they thought. A meaningful Access to Court simply implies each person who has suffered a harnm, can have the matter heard by an objective decision on the mater.
In Civil actions, representing your self without a lawyer (Pro-Se) is repeatedly likened to a battle of David vs. Goliath proportions. After being brutally beaten by the Courts, seeing others so torn to shreds instead of receiving fairness at the hands of the courts, I not only call a Pro-Se vs lawyer, a David vs Goliath crusade. I call it a skirmish in which David the self-reporting party, is devoid any ammo.
As if that is not enough of a disadvantage the Davids are also not just devoid of stones, they are given a broken sling shot.
I talk about only Civil litigation, as in my case, a car accident. Or a land use issue, or contracts disputes, divorces, etc. Civil Cases, are legal cases brought against law biding individuals.
Low-Income people involved in car accidents are not entitled to a free
lawyer.” If a landlord wants you Out, the eviction is a civil matter. That’s one of the few matters which understaffed Legal Aide can handle. Civil matters can cost thousands of dollars. Being unable to pay rent because you are repaying 3 times the amount owed, or what you do not owe, can worst then being in jail.
In my car accident a young driver pulled out in to my travel lane, and WITHOUT TRIAL,I owe the better part of a years income.
Civil actions often amount to uncivilized acts against the underpaid (Formally poor) and the lower middle-classes. When Rules and Procedures of the courts, are used against people who have little choice then to represent themselves against fancy lawyers, meaningful access to the Courts, or having a third uninterested party listen to the facts, in other words Justice, is all but an illusion.
Let us talk about a Court system, which protects the “Livelihood of Lawyers” over the 6th amendment right to represent yourself, at trial. Self-representation is based back in colonial times, when one person could bring or defend against another in court, AND HAVE THE FACTS OF THE CASE HEARD. It called protecting the Status Quo.
The 6th amendment constitutional right to effective counsel, is the heart of “Freedom” as America advertises it in jr. high and high school civic classes. Yet since the 1980’s if not before, Courts have felt free to announce that Pro-Se’s or those representing themselves without lawyers will be held to the written standard which lawyers are held. Only in practice Lawyers are held to a typically more lenient to attorneys then courts are to the self representer’s.
Making a living at the law, the Court Grants lawyers all kinds of leniency not granted to a Pro-Se person. Judges are reluctant to finalize a case if the lawyer has a good reason for missing a court date. -I was ill. This is one excusable reason for someone who passed the bar..- In cases where, the self-representer was sick, say on the pre- trial hearing, the case is permanently closed in favor of the Plaintiffs insurance company. As with my car accident case.
With a lawyer who depends on Law for his source of income such a reason would be “an excusable reason.” And the case would be added back on the docket, as soon as the attorney made a motion for such.
Another reason people not willing to be on the streets to pay a lawyer are deprived of justice of trial is the Judges 1) do not want to take time to read the plain English complaints, and other filings. 2) they wish to clear their dockets.
This holding Pro-Se’s to a higher standard as any lawyer, is couched in seemly fair language. Saying the Pro-Se should not benefit by their absence of a lawyer.
And yes I wholely agree, if there is no legal basis for a case, the case should be dismissed before trial. But in the UNFAIR application of “Not benefiting by self-representing status,” Holding Pro-se’s to an impossible criterion, as to eject from 55% to 98% of the cases on Rules and Procedures alone, is to deny Americans their American Rights.
In fact the people most likely to be forced to utilize this method of defense, or what the courts call the indigent. By Law federal Courts are charged with PROTECTING minority rights of the indigent. When I asked the Department of Justice how many cases, are thrown out without trial, they said they do not keep court records on that account. So How does Federal Court Protect the Rights of the indigent
In order to judge how valid the premature dismissals are, the numbers of casing lacking the hearing of facts by a impartial person, should be calculated. This is the best means to tell if self representing parties are handed a torn & empty slingshot.
For Americans to enjoy a highest standard of freedom, Pro-Se's should be given fair trials. Instead, from 1977 until 2009 just the illusion of fairness, prevails.
It’s time each of us stands to Stand up for our rights. Call the Judge lounge of the federal Appeal Mass Court.
Tell President Obama to Fix this dirty secret.
A Badly Torn and Empty Slingshot.
By Jan LightfootLane 207/453-2353
Denial of "Meaningful Access to American Courts" means, Americans are less Free, than they thought. A meaningful Access to Court simply implies each person who has suffered a harnm, can have the matter heard by an objective decision on the mater.
In Civil actions, representing your self without a lawyer (Pro-Se) is repeatedly likened to a battle of David vs. Goliath proportions. After being brutally beaten by the Courts, seeing others so torn to shreds instead of receiving fairness at the hands of the courts, I not only call a Pro-Se vs lawyer, a David vs Goliath crusade. I call it a skirmish in which David the self-reporting party, is devoid any ammo.
As if that is not enough of a disadvantage the Davids are also not just devoid of stones, they are given a broken sling shot.
I talk about only Civil litigation, as in my case, a car accident. Or a land use issue, or contracts disputes, divorces, etc. Civil Cases, are legal cases brought against law biding individuals.
Low-Income people involved in car accidents are not entitled to a free
lawyer.” If a landlord wants you Out, the eviction is a civil matter. That’s one of the few matters which understaffed Legal Aide can handle. Civil matters can cost thousands of dollars. Being unable to pay rent because you are repaying 3 times the amount owed, or what you do not owe, can worst then being in jail.
In my car accident a young driver pulled out in to my travel lane, and WITHOUT TRIAL,I owe the better part of a years income.
Civil actions often amount to uncivilized acts against the underpaid (Formally poor) and the lower middle-classes. When Rules and Procedures of the courts, are used against people who have little choice then to represent themselves against fancy lawyers, meaningful access to the Courts, or having a third uninterested party listen to the facts, in other words Justice, is all but an illusion.
Let us talk about a Court system, which protects the “Livelihood of Lawyers” over the 6th amendment right to represent yourself, at trial. Self-representation is based back in colonial times, when one person could bring or defend against another in court, AND HAVE THE FACTS OF THE CASE HEARD. It called protecting the Status Quo.
The 6th amendment constitutional right to effective counsel, is the heart of “Freedom” as America advertises it in jr. high and high school civic classes. Yet since the 1980’s if not before, Courts have felt free to announce that Pro-Se’s or those representing themselves without lawyers will be held to the written standard which lawyers are held. Only in practice Lawyers are held to a typically more lenient to attorneys then courts are to the self representer’s.
Making a living at the law, the Court Grants lawyers all kinds of leniency not granted to a Pro-Se person. Judges are reluctant to finalize a case if the lawyer has a good reason for missing a court date. -I was ill. This is one excusable reason for someone who passed the bar..- In cases where, the self-representer was sick, say on the pre- trial hearing, the case is permanently closed in favor of the Plaintiffs insurance company. As with my car accident case.
With a lawyer who depends on Law for his source of income such a reason would be “an excusable reason.” And the case would be added back on the docket, as soon as the attorney made a motion for such.
Another reason people not willing to be on the streets to pay a lawyer are deprived of justice of trial is the Judges 1) do not want to take time to read the plain English complaints, and other filings. 2) they wish to clear their dockets.
This holding Pro-Se’s to a higher standard as any lawyer, is couched in seemly fair language. Saying the Pro-Se should not benefit by their absence of a lawyer.
And yes I wholely agree, if there is no legal basis for a case, the case should be dismissed before trial. But in the UNFAIR application of “Not benefiting by self-representing status,” Holding Pro-se’s to an impossible criterion, as to eject from 55% to 98% of the cases on Rules and Procedures alone, is to deny Americans their American Rights.
In fact the people most likely to be forced to utilize this method of defense, or what the courts call the indigent. By Law federal Courts are charged with PROTECTING minority rights of the indigent. When I asked the Department of Justice how many cases, are thrown out without trial, they said they do not keep court records on that account. So How does Federal Court Protect the Rights of the indigent
In order to judge how valid the premature dismissals are, the numbers of casing lacking the hearing of facts by a impartial person, should be calculated. This is the best means to tell if self representing parties are handed a torn & empty slingshot.
For Americans to enjoy a highest standard of freedom, Pro-Se's should be given fair trials. Instead, from 1977 until 2009 just the illusion of fairness, prevails.
It’s time each of us stands to Stand up for our rights. Call the Judge lounge of the federal Appeal Mass Court.
Tell President Obama to Fix this dirty secret.
Saturday, December 19, 2009
The Yesterday That Never Was.
There is a new office in Federal government. It is called Social Innovations. Run by Tom Sheridan.
My suggestion for an re- innovation is to simple. Return to a time when Citizenship included the RIGHT TO BE HEARD in the Courts.
I will give you the benefit of the doubt, that you might actually care about the people you serve and not a big paycheck. I hope to be proved right.
Oh a quick intro I am a 60 year old woman who has dedicated 30 years to the homeless without pay. Often feeling like a unwilling clog in the machine grinding down people into nothing. In the name of Profits. I have ideas from myself and those I serve. I would love to be heard, at the White House.
I operate a Homeless Crisis Hotline. Where those I serve who are eligible for town aid are routinely denied by governmental officials.
UPON the issue of my doing my job to the best of my ability With OUT, governmental lies to the people who call me for help, the US Courts doors, are closed to me for redress, because I cannot afford a Lawyer. The state has NO Valid reason to interfere with my success rate of Housing the Homeless. Tried to correct this practice in Court in 06 and 07 dismissed. (technicalities)
It would be great to take 50-200 leaders fighting to end 100% poverty, and their significant others and asked for solutions. Fly them first to DC. Place them in a luxury motel.
Then President Obama, have a Long lunch with them, get workable ideas and solutions. Then give them a vacation a few days in the motel and a stipend. The solutions are With Us Underpaid, workers, mothers and disabled. We know the Barriers First hand.
Tom, this is basically what I wrote to President Obama
I WANT A PRESIDENTIAL PARDON, FROM BEING A FOURTH CLASS CITIZEN.
My right to travel is impaired I was offered a spot to speak at National Students Against Hunger and Homelessness at Chicago Loyola U. This week-end, the 6th of NOV I was to present to students from all over America.
Only poverty caused my lost of Drivers license. I had not photo ID. As my license was no longer valid. My right to drive, has been twice removed without a hearing on the facts. This due to a car accident. I missed a pretrial hearing. Usually a lawyer is given a change to set things right. So why not someone knowing less than a lawyer? For thousands of years the wisdom went in favor of the self-representing party, on technicalities alone.
I was barred from presenting my side of the story not because there was no dispute, but upon technicalities alone. I am prevented from accomplishing my calling by twisted law designed to eradicate use of the courts by the poor. This case has gone on since 2004, I paid over $1,200 and only $200 counts to the Principal.
The car was purchases at $1,000. I owe around $3,000. That is nearly half my income for a year. Lacking income, and fighting the Corrupt System, is like trying to climb up a 90 degree hill.
I contended I was only 1/2 at fault. The insurance said I was 75% at fault but it will cost me Way over the 100% of the accident. The court heard NONE OF THIS. Smoking mirrors made my rights vanish.
Yes Obama you are black but have no idea what it is like to be poor, of any color.
If you can pardon criminals; Please, I beg you Please, try to pardon me, for being a 60 lady without sufficient income.
The worst part of all this IS there are people out there not able to exercise their right to be human. My violation was travel and right to speak.
There are people out there who lack a roof over their heads or ample food in their Kids bellies. Our federal and state courts being for those who can afford attorneys, keeps them homeless, and in unneeded misery.
I would love my day in court. But you cannot do anything about a Maine state Court. Except to say the State Court Judge swore to uphold the USA Constitution. This could be a factor in making judges PROTECT the rights of the indigent. Another alternative would be issuing a social innovation fighter a federal driving license. That would be one cure.
You can retract the needing ID to Fly, take a bus, or a train. The Real ID only makes terrorist get fake ones. It has made Americans Less FREE
The only crime I am guilty of is being born poor, and staying poor, working at minimum wage, for all but 5 years of my life. There are 120 million of us out there who need a pardon.
State and Federal Jurist takes on oath to unhold the US Constitution. Then dismisses valid cases on technicalities, not usually applied against School Taught Lawyers. Why? To Lessen the Dockets.
This has and IS being done since around a 1974, 1977 Criminal case. It is called something like Frattteia vs the US. Its where the US Supreme Court ignore 700 - 1,500 years wisdom and hold criminally charged people, who cannot afford a lawyer to a HIGHER Technical standard then A Schooled attorney.
If you can afford a lawyer or accept the underpaid court appointed lawyer, you can complain he was ineffective at trial. If you represent yourself, without a lawyer no such claim is permitted.
When the phrase "Not benefit from their absents of a lawyer" is applied without logic, it transform the legal system into a series of hurdles.
In civil Cases average persons who cannot afford a lawyer, are held to a higher standard of technical proficiency then lawyers. This is CONTRARY to the concepts of Justice.
I want to contribute to life, up to the level my skills allow. Not, merely but a vessel to pay bills. Without a drivers license I cannot drove 80 year old women around in search of an apartment.
What Right has to Government to say I can not follow my heart, in legal endeavors? My social innovation is to return to a Freer America. Let us fill the dream. Let us end 100% of poverty.
My suggestion for an re- innovation is to simple. Return to a time when Citizenship included the RIGHT TO BE HEARD in the Courts.
I will give you the benefit of the doubt, that you might actually care about the people you serve and not a big paycheck. I hope to be proved right.
Oh a quick intro I am a 60 year old woman who has dedicated 30 years to the homeless without pay. Often feeling like a unwilling clog in the machine grinding down people into nothing. In the name of Profits. I have ideas from myself and those I serve. I would love to be heard, at the White House.
I operate a Homeless Crisis Hotline. Where those I serve who are eligible for town aid are routinely denied by governmental officials.
UPON the issue of my doing my job to the best of my ability With OUT, governmental lies to the people who call me for help, the US Courts doors, are closed to me for redress, because I cannot afford a Lawyer. The state has NO Valid reason to interfere with my success rate of Housing the Homeless. Tried to correct this practice in Court in 06 and 07 dismissed. (technicalities)
It would be great to take 50-200 leaders fighting to end 100% poverty, and their significant others and asked for solutions. Fly them first to DC. Place them in a luxury motel.
Then President Obama, have a Long lunch with them, get workable ideas and solutions. Then give them a vacation a few days in the motel and a stipend. The solutions are With Us Underpaid, workers, mothers and disabled. We know the Barriers First hand.
Tom, this is basically what I wrote to President Obama
I WANT A PRESIDENTIAL PARDON, FROM BEING A FOURTH CLASS CITIZEN.
My right to travel is impaired I was offered a spot to speak at National Students Against Hunger and Homelessness at Chicago Loyola U. This week-end, the 6th of NOV I was to present to students from all over America.
Only poverty caused my lost of Drivers license. I had not photo ID. As my license was no longer valid. My right to drive, has been twice removed without a hearing on the facts. This due to a car accident. I missed a pretrial hearing. Usually a lawyer is given a change to set things right. So why not someone knowing less than a lawyer? For thousands of years the wisdom went in favor of the self-representing party, on technicalities alone.
I was barred from presenting my side of the story not because there was no dispute, but upon technicalities alone. I am prevented from accomplishing my calling by twisted law designed to eradicate use of the courts by the poor. This case has gone on since 2004, I paid over $1,200 and only $200 counts to the Principal.
The car was purchases at $1,000. I owe around $3,000. That is nearly half my income for a year. Lacking income, and fighting the Corrupt System, is like trying to climb up a 90 degree hill.
I contended I was only 1/2 at fault. The insurance said I was 75% at fault but it will cost me Way over the 100% of the accident. The court heard NONE OF THIS. Smoking mirrors made my rights vanish.
Yes Obama you are black but have no idea what it is like to be poor, of any color.
If you can pardon criminals; Please, I beg you Please, try to pardon me, for being a 60 lady without sufficient income.
The worst part of all this IS there are people out there not able to exercise their right to be human. My violation was travel and right to speak.
There are people out there who lack a roof over their heads or ample food in their Kids bellies. Our federal and state courts being for those who can afford attorneys, keeps them homeless, and in unneeded misery.
I would love my day in court. But you cannot do anything about a Maine state Court. Except to say the State Court Judge swore to uphold the USA Constitution. This could be a factor in making judges PROTECT the rights of the indigent. Another alternative would be issuing a social innovation fighter a federal driving license. That would be one cure.
You can retract the needing ID to Fly, take a bus, or a train. The Real ID only makes terrorist get fake ones. It has made Americans Less FREE
The only crime I am guilty of is being born poor, and staying poor, working at minimum wage, for all but 5 years of my life. There are 120 million of us out there who need a pardon.
State and Federal Jurist takes on oath to unhold the US Constitution. Then dismisses valid cases on technicalities, not usually applied against School Taught Lawyers. Why? To Lessen the Dockets.
This has and IS being done since around a 1974, 1977 Criminal case. It is called something like Frattteia vs the US. Its where the US Supreme Court ignore 700 - 1,500 years wisdom and hold criminally charged people, who cannot afford a lawyer to a HIGHER Technical standard then A Schooled attorney.
If you can afford a lawyer or accept the underpaid court appointed lawyer, you can complain he was ineffective at trial. If you represent yourself, without a lawyer no such claim is permitted.
When the phrase "Not benefit from their absents of a lawyer" is applied without logic, it transform the legal system into a series of hurdles.
In civil Cases average persons who cannot afford a lawyer, are held to a higher standard of technical proficiency then lawyers. This is CONTRARY to the concepts of Justice.
I want to contribute to life, up to the level my skills allow. Not, merely but a vessel to pay bills. Without a drivers license I cannot drove 80 year old women around in search of an apartment.
What Right has to Government to say I can not follow my heart, in legal endeavors? My social innovation is to return to a Freer America. Let us fill the dream. Let us end 100% of poverty.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)