Register  |   |   |  Calendar  |  Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 3      1   2   3   Next
Moderator

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 3,096
Reply with quote  #1 
Senate File 507 (joint physical care bill) was voted out of committee yesterday 15 to 0.  Are we ready to lobby? 
 
 


__________________
IowaFathers
P.O. Box 2884
Waterloo, IA 50704-2884
support@IowaFathers.com
Website: http://www.IowaFathers.com
Visit us on facebook under Groups: Iowa Fathers



"Political reasons have not the requisite certainty to afford juridical interpretation. They are different in different men. They are different in the same men at different times. And when a strict interpretation of the Constitution, according to the fixed rules which govern the interpretation of laws, is abandoned, and the theoretical opinions of individuals are allowed to control its meaning, we have no longer a Constitution; we are under a government of individual men, who for the time being have the power to declare what the Constitution is, according to their own views of that it ought to mean." Dred Scott v.Sanford, 19 How. 393, 620 (1857) (Curtis, J., dissenting).
carmelita

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 95
Reply with quote  #2 

It may be a topic to discuss at the April 21st rally


__________________
carmelita t.shah
JudyChat

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 919
Reply with quote  #3 

What does that mean?  Does that mean it's dead?

Harry

Avatar / Picture

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 102
Reply with quote  #4 
The bill passed through committee and is eligible to be debated in the house.
 
We have roughly a two week window to get the bill over the to the Iowa House. 
 
 

__________________
"At the beginning of a great national change, the patriot is a scarce man: scorned, ridiculed and forgotten. When his cause succeeds, however, all men will join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." - Mark Twain


Big_Eric

Avatar / Picture

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 907
Reply with quote  #5 

I thought it would have to pass the entire Senate first, before it gets sent to the house? I am glad to see that the vote was 15 all in favor of it. A majority of Democrats sit on this committee from what I see. That is a good sign.


__________________
Eric E. Durnan
Wadena, Iowa

[i]I don't see the glass as being half full or half empty. I see the glass as being twice as large as it needs to be. [/b]
JudyChat

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 919
Reply with quote  #6 

Is there a plan to make a trip to Des Moines to lobby?

IceMountain

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 161
Reply with quote  #7 
Ok, so what do we do now?  How do we lobby?  Letters and E-mails?  Who do we direct them to?
 
p.s. I, too, thought that the 15 to 0 vote meant that it was dead and wasn't going anywhere else.

__________________
~~Every child has the right to be treated as a person and not as a pawn, possession or a negotiating chip~~
KenRichards

Avatar / Picture

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,895
Reply with quote  #8 
I wrote every Senator asking them to vote for SF507 with variations of this basic letter.  I sent individual emails just to make sure they would get the email as the SPAM filters for the legislature catch emails sent with multiple addresses.
 

Dear Senator,

I support SF507 as this is truly a landmark piece of legislation that will finally give our children a chance to have both parents.   The most important feature of this bill is the Rebuttal Presumption it places on the party wishing to deny Joint Physical Custody.  We absolutely need this in the law to stop the many judges who simply will not grant Joint Physical Care.  Our campaign against Judge Pelton's retention last year highlighted our frustration with judges acting in such a destructive manner. 

I care deeply for this cause and may run against Janet Peterson, someone who has not supported this issue, next session as I am ready to come home after four years of service in Iraq & Afghanistan.  I believe the destruction of our family at the hands of an outdated court system is every bit as important as the war on terror to our future.  If we can spread freedom and democracy across the world I believe we should be free to protect our children as well.  How can a person protect their children when they are only a parent for purposes of a paycheck?  I didn’t have to go to the Middle East to miss my children because Iowa’s courts did that long before.

Please do whatever you can to help SF507 become a law.

Sincerely,

 

Ken Richards

http://www.iowafathers.com

Baghdad, Iraq

 
 
KenRichards

Avatar / Picture

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,895
Reply with quote  #9 
Concentrate on these State Senators with a message encouraging them to vote for SF507.
 
Just send something to let them know how important it is to vote "YES."
 

Angelo Jeff jeff.angelo@legis.state.ia.us

Appel Staci staci.appel@legis.state.ia.us

Beall Daryl daryl.beall@legis.state.ia.us

Black Dennis dennis.black@legis.state.ia.us

Boettger Nancy nancy.boettger@legis.state.ia.us

Bolkcom Joe joe.bolkcom@legis.state.ia.us

Connolly Michael mike.connolly@legis.state.ia.us

Courtney Thomas thomas.courtney@legis.state.ia.us

Danielson Jeff jeff.danielson@legis.state.ia.us

Dearden Dick dick.dearden@legis.state.ia.us

Dotzler William bill.dotzler@legis.state.ia.us

Gaskill E. Thurman thurman.gaskill@legis.state.ia.us

Gronstal Michael michael.gronstal@legis.state.ia.us

Hahn James james.hahn@legis.state.ia.us

Hatch Jack jack.hatch@legis.state.ia.us

Heckroth Bill bill.heckroth@legis.state.ia.us

Houser Hubert hubert.houser@legis.state.ia.us

Johnson David david.johnson@legis.state.ia.us

Kettering Steve steve.kettering@legis.state.ia.us

Kibbie John john.kibbie@legis.state.ia.us

Lundby Mary mary.lundby@legis.state.ia.us

McCoy Matt matt.mccoy@legis.state.ia.us

McKinley Paul paul.mckinley@legis.state.ia.us

Mulder Dave dave.mulder@legis.state.ia.us

Olive Rich rich.olive@legis.state.ia.us

Putney John john.putney@legis.state.ia.us

Ragan Amanda amanda.ragan@legis.state.ia.us

Rielly Tom tom.rielly@legis.state.ia.us

Schmitz Becky becky.schmitz@legis.state.ia.us

Seng Joe joe.seng@legis.state.ia.us

Seymour James james.seymour@legis.state.ia.us

Stewart Roger roger.stewart@legis.state.ia.us

Wieck Ron ron.wieck@legis.state.ia.us

Wood Frank Frank.Wood@legis.state.ia.us

Zaun Brad brad.zaun@legis.state.ia.us

 

Moderator

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 3,096
Reply with quote  #10 
Here is my email sent to all Iowa Senators:
 
 

Dear Senators,

 

Please support Senate File 507 and allow it to come to the Senate Floor for a debate. The Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously voted in favor of SF507, indicating strong bipartisan support.  

 

With the divorce rate over 50%, many children are impacted by divorce. A rebuttable presumption of joint physical care will de-escalate the child custody conflict and result in a win-win situation not only for parents but for our children, society, and taxpayers.

 

A study just released by UNICEF ranked the top 21 wealthiest countries in the world on their children’s well being.  The United States received the second worst ranking (20 out of 21), citing divorce and the number of children being raised in single-parent households as major risk factors.

 

Considering research has validated and confirmed that the benefits of a joint physical care arrangement outweigh the typical custody arrangement, it is time for the State of Iowa to put our children first, not preserve the existing divorce industry for a select few, and make joint physical care the norm!

 

For additional information on joint physical care, please click here.

 

Thank you for supporting Senate File 507!!!

 

Sincerely,

Bryan Iehl

Founder

IowaFathers.com

P.O. Box 2884

Waterloo, IA  50704-2884

support@IowaFathers.com

__________________
IowaFathers
P.O. Box 2884
Waterloo, IA 50704-2884
support@IowaFathers.com
Website: http://www.IowaFathers.com
Visit us on facebook under Groups: Iowa Fathers



"Political reasons have not the requisite certainty to afford juridical interpretation. They are different in different men. They are different in the same men at different times. And when a strict interpretation of the Constitution, according to the fixed rules which govern the interpretation of laws, is abandoned, and the theoretical opinions of individuals are allowed to control its meaning, we have no longer a Constitution; we are under a government of individual men, who for the time being have the power to declare what the Constitution is, according to their own views of that it ought to mean." Dred Scott v.Sanford, 19 How. 393, 620 (1857) (Curtis, J., dissenting).
IceMountain

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 161
Reply with quote  #11 
Please somebody tell me if my letter makes sense!  I can't think straight but I wanted to accomplish it tonight.
 

Dear Senators,

The state of Iowa took a step in the right direction in 2004 when it approved HF22. However, more work is still needed! Recently, the Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously voted in favor of SF507, which provides for a rebuttable presumption that joint physical care is in the best interest of a child because it provides for maximum continuing physical and emotional contact with both parents.

SF507 creates a winning situation for children of divorce because neither parent becomes reduced to a visitor, or a paycheck, in their child’s life!! I encourage you to support Senate File 507 and help preserve each parent’s role in their child’s life!

Sincerely,
(My info here)

__________________
~~Every child has the right to be treated as a person and not as a pawn, possession or a negotiating chip~~
KenRichards

Avatar / Picture

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,895
Reply with quote  #12 
Yes!
 
This is perfect.  Please send to everyone.
IceMountain

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 161
Reply with quote  #13 

Thanks Ken!  Will start sending now!


__________________
~~Every child has the right to be treated as a person and not as a pawn, possession or a negotiating chip~~
IceMountain

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 161
Reply with quote  #14 
And here's my thank you letter to the judiciary committe:
 

Dear ,

SF507 creates a winning situation for children of divorce because neither parent becomes reduced to a visitor, or a paycheck, in their children’s life!!! Joint physical care provides what every child needs… maximum continuing physical and emotional contact with both parents post divorce. Thank you for supporting this important bill!

Sincerely,


__________________
~~Every child has the right to be treated as a person and not as a pawn, possession or a negotiating chip~~
KenRichards

Avatar / Picture

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,895
Reply with quote  #15 
I did not get a chance to thank the judiciary committee so it is good you did that.
 
We really need everyone on this website to send emails or make phone calls to State Senators to make sure they know there are many of us supporting this bill.
KenRichards

Avatar / Picture

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,895
Reply with quote  #16 

We need to go way out of our way to thank the State Senator who introduced this file.  I want to send them a contribution!  Who do I send it to?

Big_Eric

Avatar / Picture

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 907
Reply with quote  #17 
It says:
 
BY  LUNDBY, SENG, JOHNSON,
                                           ANGELO, DANIELSON, McCOY,
                                           WOOD, and PUTNEY
 
You better have a fat wallet.

__________________
Eric E. Durnan
Wadena, Iowa

[i]I don't see the glass as being half full or half empty. I see the glass as being twice as large as it needs to be. [/b]
JudyChat

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 919
Reply with quote  #18 
Guys, I am having trouble sending something to these senators.  I keep getting some kind of Yahoo message that says my session has expired.  I never knew I had a session! LOL
 
Any suggestions?
IceMountain

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 161
Reply with quote  #19 
Judy,
I don't have any suggestions other than to say to sign out of Yahoo and then log back in.  I've been having alot of trouble with my Yahoo mail also.  It seems to have a mind of it's own lately.  I'll open an e-mail and try to reply and a completely different e-mail will jump into my reply, etc.
 
Also, if you have more than 1 Yahoo e-mail account and you bookmark Yahoo on your browser, you should have a bookmark for each address.  Otherwise you will have to re-enter your password EVERYtime you log into the account that is not the original one set to the bookmark.
 
 

__________________
~~Every child has the right to be treated as a person and not as a pawn, possession or a negotiating chip~~
JudyChat

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 919
Reply with quote  #20 

But the problem is I don't have Yahoo mail.  I have AOL.  That's why I don't understand why it's bringing up Yahoo.

KenRichards

Avatar / Picture

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,895
Reply with quote  #21 

McCoy?  Now that is a surprise considering he has not been previously helpful to our issues.  

We can't make campaign contributions during the session so I was just asking in a general way.  
 
However, if Matt McCoy is really championing our issues I need to know about it because I had debating running against him in 2010 for State Senate.  I am still contemplating running against Janet Peterson in 2008 in the statehouse so this is all in the air now.  I am getting feedback from Republican friends in the Senate who write they are willing to help me if I do it.  
 
If SF507 becomes law I will have very little reason to enter the legislature.  I don't have a burning desire to do it as the campaign will be expensive and exhausting.  It will cost me a small fortune if I plan to be competitive against a sitting legislator in a moderate to strong Democratic district.  I will have to have a four lined auto dialer and paid staffers walking the district with 1000 yard signs to take her out.    
 
Big_Eric

Avatar / Picture

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 907
Reply with quote  #22 
Here is the letter that I felt compelled to write to my Archbishop on this bill today. It is a letter that tries to educate him in a nutshell, and hopefully gains his support for not only this, but all legislation that goes towards correcting the problems we face today. I am Catholic and have wanted to write him for some time. Well, I did it today and here is the letter. By the way, I just found out that they will not be pulling my nephew off of life support today, but that all of the doctors say that if he does manage to live, that he will be a vegetable for the rest of his life. When I went before Judge Fister, this is one example of people he doesn't cut breaks to. Those who try and fail to commit suicide. Bryan, you can like Judge Fister till the cows come home, but Judge Fister, and our laws are dead wrong on this matter. Here is my letter:
 
 
 
Your Grace,
 
    My name is Eric Durnan. When you came to Elkader last year for the large confirmation class, I was the lone adult that had you confirm me. Sadly, I didn't have much time to speak to you that night as I had to get home so my wife could go work her third shift job.
 
    You seem a very just and pious man, and I see that you took a stand against the embryonic stem cell bill. There is another bill, one in the state senate, that I would ask your public support for. It is SF 507. This bill deals with custody of children when the parents do not live together, or divorce. While we certainly do not advocate divorce, or children out of wedlock, we very well know that these issues are a real part of today's society.
 
    Under the current system, when parents enter into a dissolution, or when a child is born out of wedlock, our courts must decide what is in the best interest of the child. Many judges for many years have felt that the child belongs in one household as that creates a more stable environment. This however, creates a system where one parent becomes a "winner", and one parent becomes a "loser". The parent who loses is the now non-custodial parent (NCP). The parent who wins is the custodial parent (CP). Here's why there truly is one winner and one loser.
 
    If you are awarded primary physical care, you have a right to child support. While this may seem a natural and acceptable thing, what this means to the non-custodial parent isn't. Child support uses a very rigid formula, devised by the Supreme Court of Iowa, and child support generally ranges from 30% to 45% of one's wages. If health insurance is available to that parent, then child support comes in and forces that parent to carry the insurance, regardless of cost, and regardless if that child is already receiving health benefits from the state of Iowa in the form of Title XIX (19). In fact, if the child is receiving benefits through Iowa's Hawk-i program, then the child will be forced off of Hawk-i because Hawk-i is only available to those children that have no other coverage. Children on Hawk-i receive dental and mental health benefits, while many employer sponsored plans do not. This is not better for our children. Regardless of all of this, the costs now passed on to the NCP many times surpasses 50% of one's wages. The NCP now has to pay all of this, while trying to maintain a home for themselves, and a home for the child or children that come and visit them on average of 4 days per month. The NCP also is not eligible for many programs available to the indigent because those moneys paid out for child support are actually counted as moneys coming into the NCP's home. Our state system does not account for the fact that those moneys are taken from the parent before they even see their check. This is truly a severe injustice.
 
    The NCP now has to provide those moneys to the state child support office for the remainder of time that their child or children are not only minors, but now the courts are forcing these parents to pay support for children into their early twenties when college is involved. A NCP cannot reduce their wages either. If a NCP would like to switch jobs, in order to receive better benefits, and has to take a temporary pay cut, child support will not be reduced and that creates a heavier burden on the NCP. Many NCP's are stuck at jobs that they are miserable at because they are not allowed the flexibility to ebb and flow with the job market as needed. Further, if a NCP becomes sick, or disabled, child support generally will not reduce the parent's monthly burden and this has forced many NCP's into bankruptcy, and foreclosures, and even suicide.
 
    The worst part of this system is that there are winners to all of this. These are the custodial parents. The custodial parent gets all but 4 days generally with their child. They get the option to pick and choose any additional days to grant to the other parent. Many CP's use this as a tool of manipulation over the NCP. Whereas the courts force, and even jail NCP's into working, CP's are not expected to work and are allowed the freedom to sit to home and draw welfare. On top of this, the child support money that they receive is tax free, as the NCP has already paid the tax burden on these moneys. CP's are the only parents allowed the Earned Income Tax Credit, so the fact that the NCP pays the tax burden on the money while the CP receives thousands in the form of a credit is another injustice. Many times, the CP enters into an agreement with the state known as FIP. This program requires parents to either school or work in order to receive monthly benefits. Many of these CP's, who are educated by us, come out of this program and instead of using the education that they received, voluntarily underemploy themselves so that they can still receive food stamp, housing, and medical benefits. This means that the NCP is places with a heavier financial burden as the child support system takes into account the incomes of both parents. If a NCP is deemed to be underemployed, income is then imputed to them. Imputing is the process where a judge makes up income for the parent, and sets a child support amount based upon this legally fictitious amount. Even though the laws are on the books to impute income to CP's who are underemployed, the courts have rarely, if ever used this tactic to force a CP to bear their share of the financial burden for their children.
 
    I have only touched the tip of the iceberg here. There is no one shot, or simple solution for this problem. However, SF 507 does take an important step in helping fix the problems I have laid out before you. SF 507 would ensure that when both parents are fit parents, that there is a presumption that both parents will share the child or children equally. This eliminates the winner and loser status that now exists under current law. It has already passed the committee, and at last check, needed to go before the entire senate. From there it would go to the house, then hopefully to the governor for his signature. Your support for this bill would greatly raise public awareness to this issue.
 
    Here are a couple reasons this issue should matter to us here in the Catholic church. First, we are family oriented and should not take a stand against things that support the family unit. We also should not support those things which allow the family to dysfunction and fall apart. Secondly, we place a high value on life. We do not support abortion. The current system certainly makes abortion appear a viable alternative to being enslaved in a system for 20 plus years and only getting to visit your child. If a man conceives a child with a woman, and that relationship is anything but stable, the man may opt to pay for an abortion as $1500 now is much better than the tens of thousands paid over the course of a child's lifetime in child support, and medical support, all the while only getting to see your child on average of 4 days per month. Many fathers, especially those who conceive a child out of wedlock, do not have rights under the current system, except the right to pay child and medical support. These fathers have to fight very hard in order to get any visitation with their child. There also is no financial aid for these fathers to retain an attorney to help gain these rights. A phone call to Legal Aid of Iowa right there in Dubuque would reveal that to you. Legal Aid mainly helps women in domestic abuse cases, period. Custody battles can run easily in the $5000 range. This is because there truly is a winner, and a loser to this and to the winner goes all the spoils. Battles are very fierce because of this. The third reason we should be behind this bill is suicide.
 
    My wife is on her way to Iowa City to say goodbye to her nephew as I write this letter to you. You see, another injustice is that the custodial parent has the right under law to move without regard to the non-custodial parent. Many custodial parents use this tactic to force the non-custodial parents out of the lives of their children. There are many reasons for this. Sometimes it's because the CP gets remarried to a jealous person who wants the ex out of the picture. Sometimes it's a control issue. There are various reasons. This is one of the cruelest realities of our current system. This is all allowed under the law, and even though the CP can take the children several states away, the NCP still has to pay the child support and carry that expensive health insurance, and they can't quit their job to move because they are not allowed to reduce their wages like the CP can. The CP can afford to do these things because of the money and benefits that they receive. Yes, your Grace, their are really winners and losers here. My wife's nephew knew that too. So when his wife just got back from a week long trip out to Nebraska to find a new home for her and their children to live, he decided that he would rather die than be a loser under our system. He didn't have the money to fight, nor did he find support from our system towards his concerns. He swallowed a whole bottle of Morphine to kill the pain and he is not expected to live past today. He is just another loser in our current system. Sadly, no one will win today. My nephew has joined the countless other losing parents who have chosen to die than face living in extreme poverty, and without their children. Your support for our families is badly needed. I would love to speak to you more about this problem facing us. Father Peters from Elkader has been working with me on some of these issues so if you would like to discuss this further, please contact him and have him contact me. Senator Brian Schoenjahn from Arlington has already voted for this legislation as it was before him in his committee. Senator Schoenjahn is a member of Sacred Heart in Oelwein and is one of the three democratic legislators in our archdiocese that voted against the embryonic stem cell bill. He is for our families and would be a good one to contact regarding this bill. Thank you for your time, your Grace, and please pray for our families and our children. Please pray for those who have taken their own lives because of this mess that we're in.
 
                                                                                                                                Together in Christ,
                                                                                                                                    Eric E. Durnan 
                                                                                                                                    Wadena, Iowa

__________________
Eric E. Durnan
Wadena, Iowa

[i]I don't see the glass as being half full or half empty. I see the glass as being twice as large as it needs to be. [/b]
Chad

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,320
Reply with quote  #23 

Very good letter Eric exept you say there is one winner and one looser. In fact there is one winner and at least two or more loosers. the winner is the CP the loosers are the NCP and the children involved.


__________________
What's wrong with socialism in one sentence:
When you implement “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need,” magically, everyone starts having quite a lot of need and very little ability.
KenRichards

Avatar / Picture

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,895
Reply with quote  #24 
Eric,

I would recommend shortening it just a tad.  Otherwise - AWESOME!
Big_Eric

Avatar / Picture

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 907
Reply with quote  #25 

It's already sent. I did forget to mention the kids as losers, but I hope that's understood. I just got off of the phone again and they are going to do another brain scan and if he's not better, they're going to pull him off of the ventilator this afternoon. They have already signed papers to donate his organs and he will be buried next to his father. My nephew is 23, I believe. His father shot himself with a shotgun when he was 24 or so, for the very same reason. My sister in law left him and was about to put the screws to him and he chose death. This is not all that uncommon. My nephew is leaving a little girl and little boy behind. While our legislators speak of the blood on the hands of Bush for the war, they have blood on their hands too. I can show it to them.


__________________
Eric E. Durnan
Wadena, Iowa

[i]I don't see the glass as being half full or half empty. I see the glass as being twice as large as it needs to be. [/b]
KenRichards

Avatar / Picture

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,895
Reply with quote  #26 
This one is very close to home for you and it is all the harder considering this was 100% avoidable. 

Dick Woods knows many men who were destroyed and many left this earth because of this unjust system. 

If we can turn this thing around we will have saved many lives.
JudyChat

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 919
Reply with quote  #27 
Eric, this letter was so articulate, and very moving to read.  Quite frankly, I don't know what you would have been able to leave out.

We need to write more letters like this one to our public leaders, newspapers, ANYONE that will read them!

Also, I am so sorry to hear about your nephew.
Big_Eric

Avatar / Picture

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 907
Reply with quote  #28 

He passed away at 9:57 this evening.


__________________
Eric E. Durnan
Wadena, Iowa

[i]I don't see the glass as being half full or half empty. I see the glass as being twice as large as it needs to be. [/b]
KenRichards

Avatar / Picture

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,895
Reply with quote  #29 
Eric,

I am sorry for your loss.
Chad

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,320
Reply with quote  #30 
Another Casualty of the system. One more way the current system is destroying lives and bringing this nation that my grandfather defended in the Philippines when it was great down. In a couple of century's school children will be reading the rise and fall of the USA just like we read the rise and fall of Rome. One of the main causes the book will give for the US fall will not be terrorists or foreign threats just like the fall of Rome was not caused by outside forces.
      The fall of the USA was caused by the destruction of the family, the alienation of its military age male population, and corruption and greed in the court system, the book will read, causing the nation to crumble within making it look ripe for attack. When the attack came the men of military age who had traditionally rushed to arms to defend the nation refused to fight for a system that took everything they had including their children, home, and income. In fact many fought for the invaders in hope of "liberation". Many soldiers fighting in the middle east who'd been informed that they are now divorced and their adulterous ex now has custody of their kids and will now be rewarded with half of the soldiers pay for their treason decided they were fighting for the wrong side after seeing an Arab adulteress stoned in the streets.
         This is a possible scenario, one that can still be prevented, time is running out but it is not too late yet. Please save this nation, Please show that a true democracy can survive the test of time, Please prove that their is equality and justice in this once great nation. My ancestor shed blood and sweat for this nation and I don't want to see it fall, but I will be damned before I fight for a nation that takes a family away for someone through no fault of their own. Ken you are wrong when you say our priorities are God, country, and family in that order. Most people priorities are Family, God, Then everything else, They fight for country to defend family or God. Keep that in mind.

__________________
What's wrong with socialism in one sentence:
When you implement “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need,” magically, everyone starts having quite a lot of need and very little ability.
javiwood

Avatar / Picture

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 102
Reply with quote  #31 

Eric... my condolences to you and your family. I am sorry to hear of your loss.

Moderator

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 3,096
Reply with quote  #32 

Eric, I'm sorry to hear of your loss.  My thoughts and prayers are with you and your family! 


__________________
IowaFathers
P.O. Box 2884
Waterloo, IA 50704-2884
support@IowaFathers.com
Website: http://www.IowaFathers.com
Visit us on facebook under Groups: Iowa Fathers



"Political reasons have not the requisite certainty to afford juridical interpretation. They are different in different men. They are different in the same men at different times. And when a strict interpretation of the Constitution, according to the fixed rules which govern the interpretation of laws, is abandoned, and the theoretical opinions of individuals are allowed to control its meaning, we have no longer a Constitution; we are under a government of individual men, who for the time being have the power to declare what the Constitution is, according to their own views of that it ought to mean." Dred Scott v.Sanford, 19 How. 393, 620 (1857) (Curtis, J., dissenting).
JudyChat

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 919
Reply with quote  #33 

Ken, I believe in what you are doing.  Please keep it up!

KenRichards

Avatar / Picture

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,895
Reply with quote  #34 
I sent an email to all state senators promoting this bill and in it I mentioned I would probably run against state legislator Janet Peterson if this bill did not pass. 

I got a call from Janet's secretary on my answering machine (I check it every few days all the way in Iraq) and I am sure Janet wants to talk to me now.  I am not planning on running a positive campaign if I do run against her so regardless if I win or not she will feel the effects of my campaign. 

I relate this story to let you all know our efforts are being noticed and we are on the right track.
Moderator

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 3,096
Reply with quote  #35 
Since SF 507 is the practically the same bill as HF 2658 last year, below is from our legislative archives:

 


 

                                  

Non-custodial parents networking together to make a difference!

 

 

 

 

Joint Physical Care Television Interview

This is a television interview taken with Anelia K. Dimitrova, a professor at the University of Northern Iowa and reporter/editor for the Cedar Falls Times. She hosts a talk show called Here & There and invited Bryan Iehl, Harry Whiteside, and Jen Heth of IowaFathers.com to debate Katherine van Wormer from the University of Northern Iowa and Amber DeWitt regarding judicial bias, joint physical care, and the importance of children having equal access to both parents.  

 

NOTE: The interview has been broken down into four segments (around 10mb each) and may take some several minutes to download depending on your connection speed.

Joint Physical Care Interview Segment #1

Joint Physical Care Interview Segment #2

Joint Physical Care Interview Segment #3

Joint Physical Care Interview Segment #4


 
For problems or questions regarding this web contact webmaster@iowafathers.com.
Last updated: March 24, 2007.


__________________
IowaFathers
P.O. Box 2884
Waterloo, IA 50704-2884
support@IowaFathers.com
Website: http://www.IowaFathers.com
Visit us on facebook under Groups: Iowa Fathers



"Political reasons have not the requisite certainty to afford juridical interpretation. They are different in different men. They are different in the same men at different times. And when a strict interpretation of the Constitution, according to the fixed rules which govern the interpretation of laws, is abandoned, and the theoretical opinions of individuals are allowed to control its meaning, we have no longer a Constitution; we are under a government of individual men, who for the time being have the power to declare what the Constitution is, according to their own views of that it ought to mean." Dred Scott v.Sanford, 19 How. 393, 620 (1857) (Curtis, J., dissenting).
Big_Eric

Avatar / Picture

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 907
Reply with quote  #36 
I was about knocked off of my chair this afternoon. I got a response back from the Archbishop himself. And like I had said before, many people, including people who would be helpful to us, really do not know what is going on. They only get the official line which says that everything is under control. Here is the response from the Archbishop towards the letter that I posted above;
 
Dear Mr. Durnan,

I have studied your recent e-mail.  I was not aware of this particular legislation
My staff at the capitol will study the situation.  Your reasoning sounds strong to me
Thank you also for noting the position of Senator Schoenjahn

Sincerely,

Archbishop Jerome Hanus

 
 
 
Now that may not sound like much, but you have to realize just how busy this man is. He has a huge area to cover, and he sits on a bunch of different boards, and is in high demand for all sorts of things. I met him personally during my confirmation and he really seems to be an honest, down home man. If he says he is going to look into it, he will do it. This is a big boost for us!


__________________
Eric E. Durnan
Wadena, Iowa

[i]I don't see the glass as being half full or half empty. I see the glass as being twice as large as it needs to be. [/b]
JudyChat

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 919
Reply with quote  #37 

Eric, this is so exciting!  Thanks for posting about the results!

IceMountain

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 161
Reply with quote  #38 
Ken,
Are you going to return the call to Janet or her secretary?

__________________
~~Every child has the right to be treated as a person and not as a pawn, possession or a negotiating chip~~
Big_Eric

Avatar / Picture

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 907
Reply with quote  #39 
Ken,
   I am hoping that you do decide to run against this woman. I would love to see you challenge her to a debate, maybe on WHO radio so that Iowa can hear it. Question her about her plans to fix the situation and see if she even sees a problem. I'd let you use my nephew of an example. I can give you a picture of him and you can ask her point blank if she'd tell his kids that there isn't a problem with the system. You'd either show her as a flake, or get her to change her position. Either way, only good can come from it.

__________________
Eric E. Durnan
Wadena, Iowa

[i]I don't see the glass as being half full or half empty. I see the glass as being twice as large as it needs to be. [/b]
JudyChat

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 919
Reply with quote  #40 

I agree with Eric.

Chad

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,320
Reply with quote  #41 

I will help in anyway I can to get you elected against her.


__________________
What's wrong with socialism in one sentence:
When you implement “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need,” magically, everyone starts having quite a lot of need and very little ability.
KenRichards

Avatar / Picture

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,895
Reply with quote  #42 

I appreciate the support from all who've responded.  Janet emailed me yesterday asking for a meeting and I responded to her today.

Chad

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,320
Reply with quote  #43 

Ken I think you are on the right idea, we force the incumbents to talk to us and if they don't at least try to see things from our point of veiw we do everything we can to beat them in the next election. right now incumbents are on thin ice with the public as it is.


__________________
What's wrong with socialism in one sentence:
When you implement “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need,” magically, everyone starts having quite a lot of need and very little ability.
Big_Eric

Avatar / Picture

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 907
Reply with quote  #44 

Here's another e-mail that I received from Archbishop Hanus today. This is good news!
 
My staff has studied the bill.
We agree with you, that it improves the situation.
We have registered in favor of the bill.
As long no bad changes are made, we will support it and work toward its approval.

Archbishop Hanus


By the way, the Archdiocese of Dubuque covers Dubuque, Waterloo, and Cedar Rapids. It also covers Marshalltown, Decorah, Charles City, and many other well populated areas. If Archbishop Hanus's support for this bill is made public, that would sway a lot of support towards us. Let's hope and pray.

__________________
Eric E. Durnan
Wadena, Iowa

[i]I don't see the glass as being half full or half empty. I see the glass as being twice as large as it needs to be. [/b]
Big_Eric

Avatar / Picture

VIP Member
Registered:
Posts: 907
Reply with quote  #45 
Here are the most recent lobby declarations for SF 507.

MARCH 27, 2007  17:51:31
                    82nd General Assembly
                          SF  507
A bill for an act relating to joint physical care of children in
dissolution cases and establishing a rebuttable presumption that a
request for joint physical care is in the best interest of the
child.  (Formerly SF 315.)


David Hunsley  MARCH 26, 2007
For        IA. Fathers .Com

Douglas Sample  MARCH 26, 2007
For        IA. Fathers .Com

John Tenika  MARCH 26, 2007
For        IA. Fathers .Com

Jon Cornick  MARCH 26, 2007
For        IA. Fathers .Com

Mike Fay  MARCH 26, 2007
For        IA. Fathers .Com

Larry Murphy  MARCH 19, 2007
For        IA. Catholic Conference

Erika Anderson  MARCH 16, 2007
Against    IA. Coalition Against Sexual Assault

John Pederson  MARCH 16, 2007
Against    IA. Coalition Against Sexual Assault

Lorelei Heisinger  MARCH 16, 2007
Against    IA. Coalition Against Sexual Assault

Matt Eide  MARCH 16, 2007
Against    IA. Coalition Against Sexual Assault

Charlotte Nelson  MARCH 15, 2007
Against    IA. Commission on the Status of Women

George Appleby  MARCH 15, 2007
Undecided  IA. State Bar Assn.

Jennifer Tyler  MARCH 15, 2007
Undecided  IA. State Bar Assn.

Jim Carney  MARCH 15, 2007
Undecided  IA. State Bar Assn.

Michael Heller  MARCH 15, 2007
Undecided  IA. Academy of Trial Lawyers

Paula Feltner  MARCH 15, 2007
Undecided  IA. Academy of Trial Lawyers

Amie Whiteside  MARCH 14, 2007
For        Iowa Fathers.com

Bryan Iehl  MARCH 14, 2007
For        IA. Fathers .Com

Harry Whiteside  MARCH 14, 2007
For        Children Need Both Parents
For        Iowa Fathers.com

Martin Connell  MARCH 14, 2007
For        Children Need Both Parents
For        IA. Fathers .Com
For        IA. Fathers .Com


__________________
Eric E. Durnan
Wadena, Iowa

[i]I don't see the glass as being half full or half empty. I see the glass as being twice as large as it needs to be. [/b]
IceMountain

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 161
Reply with quote  #46 

Where do you find this stuff???


__________________
~~Every child has the right to be treated as a person and not as a pawn, possession or a negotiating chip~~
Moderator

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 3,096
Reply with quote  #47 


On the legislative website.

Here is the direct link for the lobbyist declarions for SF 507:  http://coolice.legis.state.ia.us/Cool-ICE/default.asp?Category=Lobbyist&Service=DspReport&ga=82&type=b&hbill=SF507 


Here is the direct link for SF 507: http://coolice.legis.state.ia.us/Cool-ICE/default.asp?Category=billinfo&Service=Billbook&menu=false&ga=82&hbill=SF507

__________________
IowaFathers
P.O. Box 2884
Waterloo, IA 50704-2884
support@IowaFathers.com
Website: http://www.IowaFathers.com
Visit us on facebook under Groups: Iowa Fathers



"Political reasons have not the requisite certainty to afford juridical interpretation. They are different in different men. They are different in the same men at different times. And when a strict interpretation of the Constitution, according to the fixed rules which govern the interpretation of laws, is abandoned, and the theoretical opinions of individuals are allowed to control its meaning, we have no longer a Constitution; we are under a government of individual men, who for the time being have the power to declare what the Constitution is, according to their own views of that it ought to mean." Dred Scott v.Sanford, 19 How. 393, 620 (1857) (Curtis, J., dissenting).
Moderator

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 3,096
Reply with quote  #48 
Any legislator ignoring our movement towards equality and the amount of Internet traffic we receive is committing political suicide!
 
2006: 
MonthViews/DayViewsChange
Jan43213,403 53%
Feb38110,693 20%
March92828,771 169%
April79023,704 17%
May54516,901 28%
June86125,834 52%
July95829,718 15%
Aug1,09333,909 14%
Sept82924,871 26%
Oct1,05432,700 31%
Nov1,21036,304 11%
Dec83225,809 28%

 
2007:
MonthViews/DayViewsChange
Jan1,01531,488 22%
Feb62417,485 44%
March1,36236,776 N/A


__________________
IowaFathers
P.O. Box 2884
Waterloo, IA 50704-2884
support@IowaFathers.com
Website: http://www.IowaFathers.com
Visit us on facebook under Groups: Iowa Fathers



"Political reasons have not the requisite certainty to afford juridical interpretation. They are different in different men. They are different in the same men at different times. And when a strict interpretation of the Constitution, according to the fixed rules which govern the interpretation of laws, is abandoned, and the theoretical opinions of individuals are allowed to control its meaning, we have no longer a Constitution; we are under a government of individual men, who for the time being have the power to declare what the Constitution is, according to their own views of that it ought to mean." Dred Scott v.Sanford, 19 How. 393, 620 (1857) (Curtis, J., dissenting).
IceMountain

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 161
Reply with quote  #49 

I knew I noticed more traffic, but these numbers are better than I thought!!!  Thanks for the post, Bryan.


__________________
~~Every child has the right to be treated as a person and not as a pawn, possession or a negotiating chip~~
mj23006

Member
Registered:
Posts: 6
Reply with quote  #50 
Did you notice that femi groups are the only groups opposing this legislation?  I see that the Iowa Catholic Conference also supports this bill.  This bill is the only hope a father has to get equal parenting time.  Legislators need to support the bill otherwise, I think it will be time for a change of leadership in Des Moines.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:


Create your own forum with Website Toolbox!