Bush's Former Drug Czar Kicks Off NATSAP Convention

[Deborah]

That makes about as much sense as alligator tentacles convalescing with glowing Wahhabi spleen fish.

 :rofl:  :rofl:  :rofl:  :rofl:  :rofl:
Thanks for the comic relief.

[Antigen]

Okay...I'll send them all some NATSAP truth.  In theory, the government is supposed to have a check and balance system.  Abusive programs can't oversee abusive programs.  End of story.

Yes, in theory there are checks and balances. That's the theory of limited government and real free market economy. Unfortunately, though, Who is right about how this game works these days but he's dead wrong about this having been the case since day one.

Under the original plan, no one could purchase this kind of power because it was not concentrated like it is now. Anyone with the money and the will can invest in public policy, effectively purchasing influence in any and all areas in which the government has authority (legit or not, so long as most people are wiling to accept it. Demand markets are fickle sons of bitches and often seemingly random. They simply cannot be purchased in this way.

I've said this before and I'll probably say it again. I've seen this song and dance too many times. Ask the kids who are now or have in the past 2 decades gone through SAFE and Growing Together how well all that nifty new HRS oversight worked out for them. Or ask the family of Martin Lee Anderson.

All good intentions aside, this is like drinking salt water. Might make you feel good for just a moment, but more regulation actually makes things worse because the people most motivated to wield that power are precisely the ones who should be least trusted with it.

[Troll Control]

And let's invite Osama bin Laden to discuss our next anti-terrorism bill while we're at it.

Deb, Zen, I'm sure George Miller is too shielded to bother listening to the scumbags, but what about his co-sponsors? Think they might need some grassroots political lovin'?

That didnt take long !!  I rest my case.....  "Lets just talk to the few people that agree with us, alienate the rest and then introduce the bill into Congess and see what happens...."   Hmmmm... That was 2 years ago and counting..... I wonder what went wrong?  Why didnt everyone support my bill?

The bill was killed in committee by Republicans fearing "regulation" of any private businesses, even abusive treatment centers.

Try corresponding with Congressman Miller's office, like I do, and you may actually get the facts and not have to make up stories about how the bill was stalled because "other viewpoints" weren't included.

The fact of the matter is that it was killed unilaterally by Republican congress members precisely because they didn't want the other side heard if regulation was part of the bill.

Go to the source.  Call Mr. Miller's office and stop representing as "fact" the nonsense you post that has no bearing on reality.  It's annoying and misleading.

[TheWho]

And let's invite Osama bin Laden to discuss our next anti-terrorism bill while we're at it.

Deb, Zen, I'm sure George Miller is too shielded to bother listening to the scumbags, but what about his co-sponsors? Think they might need some grassroots political lovin'?

That didnt take long !!  I rest my case.....  "Lets just talk to the few people that agree with us, alienate the rest and then introduce the bill into Congess and see what happens...."   Hmmmm... That was 2 years ago and counting..... I wonder what went wrong?  Why didnt everyone support my bill?

The bill was killed in committee by Republicans fearing "regulation" of any private businesses, even abusive treatment centers.

Try corresponding with Congressman Miller's office, like I do, and you may actually get the facts and not have to make up stories about how the bill was stalled because "other viewpoints" weren't included.

The fact of the matter is that it was killed unilaterally by Republican congress members precisely because they didn't want the other side heard if regulation was part of the bill.

Go to the source.  Call Mr. Miller's office and stop representing as "fact" the nonsense you post that has no bearing on reality.  It's annoying and misleading.

Look DJ,  If you were reading my posts carefully you would have gotten this.  I?ll go slower this time.  Here is the way it works and what happened:

The Bill (End Institutionalized Abuse Against Children Act of 2005) was introduced in April of 2005 by George Miller.  The bill did not pass?.why?  I think we discussed this at length, but in a nut shell not everyone was onboard (or included in the process).
The bill was referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs to be revised and then on to a sub committee on Select Education where it will go thru extensive revision.  I believe it is still there (here take a look)

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-1738


The next plan for this bill is:

?Congress and is expected to be re-introduced near the beginning of the 110th Congress in January 2007.  That bill is likely to lead, given that its principal sponsor is now to be a House committee chair, to a promptly scheduled hearing and congressional action. ?

http://tinyurl.com/3ah7le

(take a look under ?Commission on Youth At Risk?)

If the bill was reintroduced in the 110th Congress, then I missed it otherwise it doesn?t appear this has happened yet.

Have some coffee, DJ and calm down.  This is America, you don?t have to call and annoy every Congressman for a Bill status.

[ZenAgent]

If it looks like the bill will go through, you can bet your ass every NATSAP-er and Lon-lackey will crawl from under their rocks and "call and annoy every Congressman" trying to kill it.

I think the industry is a neo-con tool, and people are showing their disgust with that camp.  Look at the change in leadership that occurred.  You programees will be crying for help to your GOP goons and you'll be weeping bitter tears when you find out the guys you relied on for so long don't have any teeth.  

Also, to the guy who referred to what happened to my family as "one bad experience":  Oh, my God.  They don't refer to the kids who get sprung from these hellholes as "surviviors" for nothing.  My step-daughter survived over-medication, physical abuse, mental abuse and under-education.  Yeah, it was one bad experience, clown.  Why don't you check out the other two PV survivor stories on here, so you won't think I'm raising hell about "one bad experience".  

Better dead than red.  Vote Democratic.  Vote Independent.  Vote for Donald Duck, but get rid of the Bush junta.  Then people like George Miller can accomplish what they've been trying to do for twenty years.  Miller's on the level of "hero" like Phil Elberg.  In fifty years, the teen help industry will be viewed the same way we view child labor sweatshops now.

[Troll Control]

Sure, Who, you can read what's posted on a government website and try to find out how the status quo was arrived at - you can see the procedural moves.

Now, what I'm telling you is that the bill was killed by Republican committee members.  George Miller's office will confirm this fact.

The reason it never came to a vote is the same reason why NO regulatory legislation drafted by Democrats made it to the table under the previous congress:  Republicans killed it unilaterally without debate of any kind.

And I bug Congress members.  Very often, in fact.  It's called "Democracy" and you and the Rethuglicans ought to give it a try some time.

[Antigen]

That's another fond myth, DJ, that the Repugnicans hate regulation. They don't, they love the stuff just so long as it can be made to appear attractive to their various support bases. Take, for example, regulations regarding intimate relationships and gender. Who in their right friggen mind would even propose such a thing as the Federal or State governments having a hand in that? Hamilton, maybe on a bad day. Franklin? Nevah.

Big brother is watching, that's true. But he's got a sadistic,  lascivious gleam in his eye, as usual.

Usually, whenever we go through all these kinds of linguistic contortions and political gesticulations it's the same story. There are already laws of the older variety, those consistent with our traditions, that could be enforced if we had the will to do it. Frustrating as hell that we lack the will. But please look once again to Martin Lee Anderson. It's a damned important case even though the rest of the nation seems to have written it off already. It's important because of the big name culprits in the case. Where are they now?

Guy Tunnell
Founder of the Bay County Boot Camp, longtime BOA member DFAF (just like Andrea), appointed by Steve Meadows, state attorney for the 14th Judicial Circuit, to be a coordinator of cold case squads in the 14th judicial circuit's six counties.
 
Frank McKiethen
Still sheriff of Bay County
"If you have any comments or suggestions please feel free to contact our Public Affairs Specialist at (850) 747-4700 Ext. 2117"
http://www.bayso.org/

Florida Sheriff's Bootcamp program
Renamed Star Academies, handed over from one faction of the toughlove hategroup to another and funding doubled.

http://www.northcountrygazette.org/arti ... Camps.html

Martin Lee Anderson
Still deader than hell.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Anderson

[Deborah]

Well, here's a copy, before it gets "marked-up".
What's all the fuss by the opposition? This bill doesn't even make state licensing/regulation of domestic programs mandatory. It only allows for grants to create regulations/monitoring of "treatment services for children with emotional, psychological, developmental, or behavioral dysfunctions, impairments, or chemical dependencies". Participation appears to be voluntary.
All the language about fines for operating without a license (if a state chooses to license/regulation programs), abuse/neglect, etc. are standard and common to all regulations I've read.
What specifically about this bill would have a devastating effect on the industry?

H.R. 1738 [109th]: End Institutionalized Abuse Against Children Act of 2005
HR 1738 IH
109th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 1738
To assure the safety of American children in foreign-based and domestic institutions, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

April 20, 2005

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California (for himself, Mr. KILDEE, Mr. OWENS, Mr. MCDERMOTT, and Mr. VAN HOLLEN) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on International Relations, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned
----------------------------------------------------------------
A BILL
To assure the safety of American children in foreign-based and domestic institutions, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `End Institutionalized Abuse Against Children Act of 2005'.

SEC. 2. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT INVESTIGATIONS.

(a) In General- In order to assure the safety and welfare of American children residing in foreign-based institutions, the Attorney General shall seek the cooperation of appropriate foreign authorities in order to investigate such facilities or institutions periodically. Such an investigation shall include a determination of the institution's compliance with any local safety, health, sanitation and educational laws and regulations, including all licensing requirements applicable to the staff of the institution and compliance with this section. The Attorney General shall seek the cooperation of appropriate foreign authorities to remedy any threat to the safety or welfare of those children, discovered through such an investigation.

(b) Rules and Enforcement- (1) The Attorney General shall make rules to protect the safety and wellbeing of American children who are kept in a foreign based institution for purposes of behavior modification.
(2) Whoever, being a United States citizen or national, or other private entity organized under the laws of the United States or of any State or political subdivision of the United States, violates a rule made under this subsection shall be subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $50,000.

(c) Definitions- As used in this section--
(1) the term `foreign-based institution' means any facility or institution--
(A) owned, operated, or managed by a United States citizen or other private entity organized under the laws of the United States; and
(B) for persons, including persons who are residing in such facility or institution, for purposes of receiving care or treatment or behavior modification; and
(2) the term `American children' means American citizens or nationals 18 years of age or younger.

SEC. 3. AMENDMENTS TO DEPARTMENT OF STATE'S COUNTRY REPORTS ON HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES.

(a) Part I of Foreign Assistance Act of 1961- Section 116 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151n) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
`(g)(1) The report required by subsection (d) shall include, wherever applicable, a description of the nature and extent of child abuse or human rights violations against persons who are 18 years of age or younger at institutions described in paragraph (2) that are located in each foreign country.
`(2) An institution referred to in paragraph (1) is a facility or institution--
`(A) owned, operated, or managed by a United States citizen or other private entity organized under the laws of the United States; and
`(B) for persons, including persons who are residing in such facility or institution, for purposes of receiving care or treatment or behavior modification.'.

(b) Part II of Foreign Assistance Act of 1961- Section 502B of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
`(i)(1) The report required by subsection (b) shall include, wherever applicable, a description of the nature and extent of child abuse or human rights violations against persons who are 18 years of age or younger at institutions described in paragraph (2) that are located in each foreign country.
`(2) An institution referred to in paragraph (1) is a facility or institution--
`(A) owned, operated, or managed by a United States citizen or other private entity organized under the laws of the United States; and
`(B) for persons, including persons who are residing in such facility or institution, for purposes of receiving care or treatment or behavior modification.'.

SEC. 4. GRANTS TO SUPPORT INSPECTIONS OF CHILD RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT FACILITIES.

(a) In General- The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new title:
`TITLE III--GRANTS TO STATES TO SUPPORT INSPECTIONS OF CHILD RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT FACILITIES

`SEC. 301. GRANTS TO STATES.
`The Secretary is authorized to make grants to States to support inspections of child residential treatment facilities.

`SEC. 302. APPLICATION.
`The Secretary may not make a grant to a State under section 301 unless the State submits to the Secretary an application for the grant at such time, in such form and manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may reasonably require.

`SEC. 303. ELIGIBILITY.
`(a) In General- The Secretary may not make a grant to a State under section 301 unless the State has in effect laws to require the licensing of child residential treatment facilities in accordance with the requirements of subsection (b) and the State is enforcing such State laws in accordance with the requirements of subsection (c).

`(b) Licensing Requirements- The licensing requirements referred to in subsection (a) are the following:
`(1) The State requires any person who operates a child residential treatment facility to be issued a license for the operation of the facility, and the license is in effect.
`(2) The facility meets applicable standards of the State for the provision of treatment services for children with emotional, psychological, developmental, or behavioral dysfunctions, impairments, or chemical dependencies.
`(3) In the case of each child who is a resident of the facility and whose domicile is another State, the facility meets the standards of such other State for the operation of such a facility, including any licensing standards.
`(4) With respect to State law that prohibits the physical or mental abuse of children and the neglect of children, the law of the State in which the facility is located applies to the facility standards for the care of children who are residents of the facility, including enforcement standards, that are equivalent to the standards applied by the State to parents or legal guardians.
`(5) The State requires periodic, unannounced inspections of the facility to determine compliance with applicable law, including law regarding the licensing of health professionals and law regarding the standards referred to in paragraph (4).

`(c) Enforcement Requirements- The enforcement requirements referred to in subsection (a) are the following:
`(1) IN GENERAL-
`(A) CIVIL PENALTY- A person who operates a child residential treatment facility in violation of the requirements under subsection (b) is subject to a civil penalty of $250 per day until the violation is corrected, except that the number of days for which the penalty is assessed may not exceed 60 days.
`(B) ORDER TO TERMINATE OPERATIONS- With respect to a violation of the requirements under subsection (b), if a civil penalty under subparagraph (A) for the violation is assessed for 60 days, the State orders that the child residential treatment facility involved terminate all operations.

`(2) ABUSE OR NEGLECT-
`(A) CIVIL PENALTY- If a child residential treatment facility engages in the abuse or neglect of a child who is a resident of the facility, each person who owns or operates the facility, and each of the officers, employees, or contractors thereof who engaged in the abuse or neglect, is subject to a civil penalty for each such violation in an amount determined by the State, but not less than $20,000 for all violations adjudicated in a single proceeding.
`(B) CRIMINAL PENALTY- If a child residential treatment facility engages in the abuse or neglect of a child who is a resident of the facility, each person who owns or operates the facility, and each of the officers, employees, or contractors thereof who engaged in the abuse or neglect, shall be fined in accordance with title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
`(C) ABUSE OR NEGLECT- For purposes of subparagraphs (A) and (B), the term `abuse or neglect', with respect to a child, means a knowing act or omission that the officer, employee, or contractor involved knows or should know will result in death, serious physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse or exploitation, or will present an imminent risk of serious harm.

`SEC. 304. USE OF FUNDS.
`A State that receives a grant under section 301 shall use amounts under the grant to--
`(1) hire and train individuals who have appropriate expertise in the health profession, including the mental health profession, to carry out periodic, unannounced inspections of child residential treatment facilities in accordance with section 303(b)(5); and
`(2) collect and maintain data from the inspections of such child residential treatment facilities to be included in the report required by section 306.

`SEC. 305. MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT.
`A State that receives a grant under section 301 shall use amounts under the grant only to supplement the level of non-Federal funds that, in the absence of amounts under the grant, would be expended for activities authorized under the grant, and not to supplant those non-Federal funds.

`SEC. 306. REPORT.
`The Secretary may not make a grant to a State under section 301 unless the State agrees that it will submit to the Secretary for each fiscal year for which it receives a grant under such section a report that contains such information as the Secretary may reasonably require, including a detailed description of the number of child residential treatment facilities located in the State, the number of children residing at such facilities, the State domicile of each child prior to entry at such a facility, and the age, gender, and disability (if any) of each child at such a facility.

`SEC. 307. DEFINITIONS.
`In this title:
`(1) CHILD- The term `child' means an individual 18 years of age or younger.
`(2) CHILD RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT FACILITY; FACILITY- The term `child residential treatment facility' or `facility' means a facility that--
`(A) provides a 24-hour group living environment for one or more children who are unrelated to the owner or operator of the facility; and
`(B) offers for the children room or board and specialized treatment, behavior modification, rehabilitation, discipline, emotional growth or rehabilitation services for youths with emotional, psychological, developmental, or behavioral dysfunctions, impairments, or chemical dependencies.
`(3) SECRETARY- The term `Secretary' means the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
`(4) STATE- The term `State' means each of the several States, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.

`SEC. 308. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
`There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this title $50,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2006 and 2007.'.
(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of contents of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5101 note) is amended by adding at the end the following:

`TITLE III--GRANTS TO STATES TO SUPPORT INSPECTIONS OF CHILD RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT FACILITIES
`Sec. 301. Grants to States.
`Sec. 302. Application.
`Sec. 303. Eligibility.
`Sec. 304. Use of funds.
`Sec. 305. Maintenance of effort.
`Sec. 306. Report.
`Sec. 307. Definitions.
`Sec. 308. Authorization of appropriations.'.

Cosponsors
Rep. Dale Kildee [D-MI]
Rep. James McDermott [D-WA]
Rep. Major Owens [D-NY]
Rep. Fortney Stark [D-CA]
Rep. Christopher Van Hollen [D-MD]
Rep. Nydia Velázquez [D-NY]
Rep. Lynn Woolsey [D-CA]
Rep. David Wu [D-OR]

[TheWho]

Sure, Who, you can read what's posted on a government website and try to find out how the status quo was arrived at - you can see the procedural moves.

Now, what I'm telling you is that the bill was killed by Republican committee members.  George Miller's office will confirm this fact.

The reason it never came to a vote is the same reason why NO regulatory legislation drafted by Democrats made it to the table under the previous congress:  Republicans killed it unilaterally without debate of any kind.

And I bug Congress members.  Very often, in fact.  It's called "Democracy" and you and the Rethuglicans ought to give it a try some time.

DJ, I admire your simplistic view on Democracy ?the good guys versus the bad guys?.  But one needs to step back and look at the larger picture.  If you are trying to get a bill passed you have to include everyone and position the wording so that it covers the majority of the peoples needs, it is just the way it works.  How have the kids been helped by drafting a bill that included only one party and is now unimplemented and on a shelf?  If more were included, initially,  the bill might have gone thru and regulation would moving forward (maybe not with all the original requirements) but moving forward all the same.

Of course if you call George Millers office they are going to tell you it was the Republicans fault, what else would you expect.  If you called Ford motor company and asked why they are 10 years behind the Japanese they will point their finger at GM for dragging the pollution requirements out for over a decade and driving up the costs so that other improvements had to be put on the shelf.  If you called GM you would get a different story.

[ZenAgent]

I did call Sen. Miller.  He blamed you.

[TheWho]

I did call Sen. Miller.  He blamed you.

You know that really sucks!!  He and I always saw eye to eye on every issue until this one.  I merely suggested we include NATSAP and tweak a few of the words, I never lobbied against it or spoke to any Republican regarding how they should position their vote.

[Troll Control]

PSY Wrote:

So why don't the parent's just look at the evidence? Why don't you call your daughter? You don't want to know... It comforts you: believing you were right.. You can't face the possibility that you sent your kid to be abused, and ignored her cries for help. That's right, "Who", you did the right thing... your daughter is the perfect image of you, she loves you unconditionally. She thanks you for sending her there...

You cannot face this simple truth: There are certain things that can completely sever the ties of love between parent and child. There is no such thing as "unconditional". Fool yourself all you wish, but if I were you, I would at least ask those questions you are afraid to, and beg for the forgiveness that you do not deserve.

That is pretty intense and it is a good point,psy.  Parents should keep a thumb on the pulse of their child and listen to how they are doing.  If they sound distressed when they call you should ask to have another conference with them to insure that they are okay.  I remember on a particular occasion, after my daughter ran away , that she sounded distressed and we scheduled another call back about an hour later and we talked it thru and spoke for about 45 minutes.  She was struggling with a balance between her school work and what they expected to do during her off time which didn?t allow for her studies.  She wasn?t use to working that hard.  My daughter doesn?t thank me for sending her there but she understands that it was good for her (she wouldn?t want to do it over again, though).
I am not a big believer in ?unconditional love?. I think the bond between a parent and child is built upon a foundation started from infancy and is solidified over time from years of trust and formed from the natural dependency, nurturing and love that occurs and that the home is a safe place to grow, spread your wings, make mistakes, fall and start over.  The home should never be a place to be embarrassed or feel ashamed it should be a place to practice life without being judged.  If this process is interrupted or threatened the parent is the one who needs to step in and right its course.

If I asked my daughter tomorrow where she would rather be if there was trouble in her life I know she would chose home, because that is where her family is and that is where she feels safe.  This is the place she comes to when she needs to sort out answers or scream at someone or ask for advice or feel safe.
Unconditional love, no it isn?t?but we continue to work on it every day and the working at it is what love is and it keeps us together.

This says a lot about you, Who.  Thanks for at least sharing that you believe there is no unconditional love from a parent to a child.

This is precisely the type of mentality (or mental defect) that the industry is based upon.  Pretty sick concept, but you did a lot with that little admission to shine a light on how parents in this industry behave.  

These people just aren't right in the head or the heart.  That's why they think it's just fine and dandy to sever all communications and punish their "bad" kid into a "love-worthy" one (i.e. one that does everything they say and acts exactly how they want).  Twisted.

Ya know. It would be one thing if NATSAP actually pretended to care, but they don't even do that. When i attempted to report Benchmark's lack of licensure they told me "well we don't investigate that". When i told them they were abusive, they didn't care either. When I told them They didn't follow NATSAP's own "principles of good practice" i was told that they were on an honor system. Schools don't join NATSAP unless they need protection and PR. I mean, if I ran an honest, caring, loving, Emotional Growth school, I would stay the hell away from an organization protecting the likes of PV, Benchmark, and countless others.

Besides. Natsap's board is stuffed with current and ex program directors, including the likes of Bucci Boy and Michael Allsgood (of Cascade infamy).

You want them to compromise and work together on this? They would only reach an agreement once NATSAP and it's schools had found a suitable loophole to exploit.

Spot on.  I personally have copies of dozens of abuse reports from HLA kids/parents to NATSAP, but when you call and ask, they dutifully reply that they have "received no complaints."  It's a flat-out lie, but they keep saying it until you go away.

NATSAP is next on my list.  Who wants some?

[Troll Control]

Of course if you call George Millers office they are going to tell you it was the Republicans fault, what else would you expect.

It's part of the congressional record, Whooter.  It was killed by the Repubs in committee.  You're so fond of looking up congressional records, go ahead and verify.  Your speculation ADDS NO VALUE to the conversation.

At least I asked.  You just make up your side of the story...  as usual...

[psy]

NATSAP is next on my list.  Who wants some?

I do.  It's next on my list too.

[Troll Control]

NATSAP is next on my list.  Who wants some?

I do.  It's next on my list too.

We need to get together.