Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate
Reload this Page >

State Department's "Think of the Children!!" Denies US Citizens Passports

State Department's "Think of the Children!!" Denies US Citizens Passports

Old Aug 15, 2007, 12:37 pm
  #16  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Winter Garden, FL
Programs: Delta DM-3MM United Gold-MM Marriott Lifetime Titanium Hertz President's Circle
Posts: 13,498
Originally Posted by chuckd
Yes. Do whatever it takes to make people pay what they owe. I am not a big fan of letting people get away with shirking responsibility easily. This seems like an easy way to catch people who might otherwise not own up to their debts. I cannot believe that there are people upset that there is a mechanism for making worthless scum support their children.
What if the child-support debt is in dispute? What if the person is challenging paternity? And what does one have to do with the other, anyway? Shouldn't there be a connection?

Bruce
bdschobel is offline  
Old Aug 15, 2007, 12:37 pm
  #17  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 210
Here Comes The Flood

Originally Posted by jedison
What exactly is wrong with making people take care of their legal obligations?
Because there's no logical limit to the program. Right now, it's a denial of passport renewal if there's a child support arrearage. Next, it's unpaid spousal support. Next, traffic or parking tickets, or utility bills. Next, it's your credit cards or other consumer debt. Before you know it, your passport is in thrall to whatever group can muster political support to protect its interests.

It's already happening to driver licenses. As Tom911 noted, many states will not renew a driver license if there is an outstanding child support obligation. But it hasn't stopped there, with many states using the driver license as a mechanism to force conformity with whatever social norm is the flavor of the political season. For example, earlier this month, Kentucky began enforcing a law which suspended the driver license of any teen who drops out of high school or has more than nine unexcused absences.

Teenagers in particular get hit with these restrictions because they have no political power. But let's remember that those of us who regularly travel internationally are a decided minority in this country. As seen by the policies of TSA and CBP, the interests of FFers count for little.

These policies can easily propagate:

You don't buy carbon offsets for your flights? No passport.

No health insurance? No passport.

You smoke? No passport.

Once you allow a government program to be used as a tool of social engineering for completely unrelated causes, there is no end to the mischief that can be caused.
PaulKarl is offline  
Old Aug 15, 2007, 12:42 pm
  #18  
Suspended
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,103
Originally Posted by chuckd
Yes. Do whatever it takes to make people pay what they owe. I am not a big fan of letting people get away with shirking responsibility easily. This seems like an easy way to catch people who might otherwise not own up to their debts. I cannot believe that there are people upset that there is a mechanism for making worthless scum support their children.
Those who are "worthless" cannot support their children to begin with, as they are without worth. And what if those Americans who are trying to make good on their payments need a passport or a renewal to make good on what they owe?

Why stop with just child support payments? Why not credit card payments overdue, unpaid parking tickets, those whose homes are in foreclosure, etc.?
GUWonder is offline  
Old Aug 15, 2007, 12:43 pm
  #19  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Between AUS, EWR, and YTO In a little twisty maze of airline seats, all alike...
Programs: CO, NW, & UA forum moderator emeritus
Posts: 35,339
Originally Posted by bdschobel
What if the child-support debt is in dispute? What if the person is challenging paternity? And what does one have to do with the other, anyway? Shouldn't there be a connection?
I have a friend who was in this situation. He tried to follow the rules but his ex-girlfriend sure made his life as difficult as she possibly could. The rules were certainly stacked against the accused, regardless of guilt.
Xyzzy is online now  
Old Aug 15, 2007, 12:46 pm
  #20  
Suspended
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,103
Originally Posted by etch5895
For criminals who try to evade their legal obligations...yeah. No problem whatsoever.
Being a debtor is the same as being a criminal? It requires far more qualifications than that.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Aug 15, 2007, 12:46 pm
  #21  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 9,740
Portions of the post that previously appeared in this space have been deleted. I would provide you with a reason why, but doing so would likely be against the TOS.

Last edited by uncertaintraveler; Dec 19, 2008 at 10:09 am
uncertaintraveler is offline  
Old Aug 15, 2007, 12:47 pm
  #22  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: UA 1K, Starwood/Marriott Plat, Others of little note
Posts: 1,148
Originally Posted by xyzzy
I have a friend who was in this situation. He tried to follow the rules but his ex-girlfriend sure made his life as difficult as she possibly could. The rules were certainly stacked against the accused, regardless of guilt.
Um, here we're talking about actual child support judgments, not some claim by somebody. So it's not accused vs. accuser, it's the court vs. the convicted.
jedison is offline  
Old Aug 15, 2007, 12:49 pm
  #23  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 91
The State of Alaska also can take drivers' licenses and other professional licenses, but rarely does it. The standards of due process they have to meet, the many levels of appeal the obligor has available, etc, make this a very slow and inefficient system.

Meanwhile many of the children are on public assistance and the $$$$ due is in fact due to the government (taxpayers) for repayment.

I do like the passport denial law, but have never seen it put into action in real life - glad to hear it is working somewhere.
HRHMom is offline  
Old Aug 15, 2007, 12:49 pm
  #24  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 9,740
Portions of the post that previously appeared in this space have been deleted. I would provide you with a reason why, but doing so would likely be against the TOS.

Last edited by uncertaintraveler; Dec 19, 2008 at 10:08 am
uncertaintraveler is offline  
Old Aug 15, 2007, 12:51 pm
  #25  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: ICN / 평택
Programs: AA, DL Gold, UA Gold, HHonors Gold
Posts: 8,714
I think that decision is best left to the judge...

Does the person need to travel internationally to repay their legal debt, or are they looking to disappear off the face of the earth and not repay?

Does that person have a valid appeal in over the child support, or are they just stalling to avoid paying?

Bringing a life into this world is an awesome responsibility and with it comes obligation. I certainly hold a child support payment defaulter in considerably lower regard than someone who misses a credit card payment or two.

I guess the question is: Why should people who disregard their legal obligations be afforded the same privlidges (passports, drivers licenses, etc) than people who do the right thing? Maybe they should consider the consequences of their actions before going through with them. I pay my taxes and bills on time. Why does someone else get a free ride not to?
etch5895 is offline  
Old Aug 15, 2007, 12:52 pm
  #26  
Suspended
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,103
Originally Posted by uncertaintraveler
Oh, yes, of course. Now it all makes sense. Because, after all, it is very difficult for people to find---or even maintain--a job in order to uphold their child support obligations when they don't have a passport.
Ordinary income earned abroad may be legally untaxed or taxed at a lower level which, in turn, enhances the ability of the person to pay their debts.

And there are jobs that require travel.

There are people who enlisted with security contractors for work in Iraq because it substantially increased their ability to pay childsupport debts. Would you make it harder for such people to pay their obligations? Making it harder is what this kind of policy can do too.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Aug 15, 2007, 12:54 pm
  #27  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: South Bend, IN
Programs: AA EXP 3 MM; Marriott Bonvoy Lifetime Titanium Elite
Posts: 18,546
The State Department should mind its f'ing business and focus on its role in government, which is NOT to enforce child support decrees.

This "cult of the child" has to end.
PresRDC is offline  
Old Aug 15, 2007, 12:55 pm
  #28  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: UA 1K, Starwood/Marriott Plat, Others of little note
Posts: 1,148
Boy, the black helicopter crowd is fully deploying their straw men on this one.

There is no "due process" issue here. These are legally binding judgments that are not being paid. If somebody wants to appeal the judgment, that is their right. But nobody's appealing the judgment, they just don't want to be held to their obligations. Poor babies. Anybody who has a problem with paying them immediately can enter into a repayment agreement in installments, which when approved by the court that issued the original judgment will release any restrictions.

You may not like it, but drivers licenses and passports are not fundamental rights. They are privileges. And they are being restricted in particularly pernicious cases, like these judgments in which some deadbeat flees the country and now starts whining when he can't travel as he chooses. Meanwhile the other parent has to care for the child. The child is the victim here, passports are not denied for unpaid alimony, only child support. If he wants to be outside U.S. jurisdiction, all he needs to do is give up his U.S. citizenship and get a passport from another country. If you choose one of the sleazier ones it's not that hard. If you don't like it, man up and pay your obligations. Or demonstrate to a judge's satisfaction that you cannot.

Don't like judges making decisions? Go become a citizen of some other country.

As for teenagers not getting to drive when they drop out of school, too bad. It's a privilege. If they don't like it, they know exactly what they have to do.
jedison is offline  
Old Aug 15, 2007, 1:02 pm
  #29  
Suspended
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,103
Originally Posted by etch5895
I guess the question is: Why should people who disregard their legal obligations be afforded the same privlidges (passports, drivers licenses, etc) than people who do the right thing? Maybe they should consider the consequences of their actions before going through with them. I pay my taxes and bills on time. Why does someone else get a free ride not to?
Why is it that a passport is considered a privilege? In the absence of an individual being convicted of criminal charges, the person is free. Then why should they not be entitled to the freedom of movement allowed all other persons not convicted of criminal charges either?
GUWonder is offline  
Old Aug 15, 2007, 1:02 pm
  #30  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 210
Et tu?

Originally Posted by etch5895
For criminals who try to evade their legal obligations...yeah. No problem whatsoever.
Spoken like someone convinced that they will never, ever be considered a criminal.

One of the lessons of the independent counsel investigations of the Bush Sr. and Clinton years is that everyone can be charged with a crime if government investigators comb through every detail of their lives.

There are more than 3,000 federal crimes, many of which are, in the words of Judge Posner, simultaneously hyper-technical and vague. Do you seriously think a team of promotion-grubbing FBI agents, overseen by a prosecutor jonesing to run for office, won't find something in your past upon which to base an indictment? Merely defending yourself could ruin you financially. And now you have to worry that your ability to earn a living overseas could be impaired.

It's "no problem whatsoever" until you are targeted.
PaulKarl is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.