IS IT LAZINESS OR STUPIDITY?
THE RISE OF THE AUTOMATED BUREAUCRATIC MACHINE AND THE DEATH OF COMMON SENSE
DENNIS L. BLEWITT, J.D. Mar., 2017
I am no longer surprised by the ignorant arrogant of our public servants drawing high salaries for not thinking or even demonstrating the capacity to do so. Not only have we dumbed down the population, but we tolerate consummate arrogance in conjunction with the ignorance. A perfect example made me a participant after I returned from my last trip. My readers know that I travel often since retirement. I consult, but do nothing that requires time restrictions or doesn’t amuse me.
So, imagine my surprise when I returned home from traveling and received two letters in the mail from the attorney regulatory counsel informing me that I was under investigation for not answering a ludicrous inquiry previously. I received both letters from my held mail. I have attached the letters so that you may judge for yourself if maybe something should be done with the officials rather than me. I find the letter insulting and I believe I should be entitled to a little curtesy from a profession to which I have dedicated 40+ years of my life. But first, a little background.
Every lawyer licensed to practice law in Colorado must pay a registration fee to support the activities of the licensing authority and to pay for investigations, research, staff and programs. The entity has rules and also follow rules of the state Supreme Court.
The Reagan administration claimed that the poor of the country were just deadbeat fathers and welfare queens driving Cadillacs. A citizenry believed this as well as that welfare was immoral. An ignorant public believed this bullshit. I had a client form a corporation to collect over $1,000,000 on a percentage basis in child support arrearages on contract from the County welfare services. Based upon my experience, I would not undertake such a venture because I know most parents try to make support payments and don’t make them for a valid reason. Since there are rarely hearings to determine the fairness or equity of a situation, judges now rubber stamp decrees based upon legislative mandated formulae.
The administration determined that being against the poor, especially those receiving aid to dependent children would gain votes. Unelected officials then got congress to mandate that states deny or revoke licenses to anyone owing any kind of child support. Legislatures raced to pass laws revoking driving licenses, plumbing licenses, real estate licenses, and attorney licenses among others to display their ignorance and support of the policy. This is similar to the labeling of “sub-human” of some people by the Nazis when the state puppets ordered deportation, sterilizations and other remedies to purify the race. Ironically, most money collected by this legislation just reimbursed the state rather than going to children. Recovering these costs caused other costs to be imposed upon other social agencies.
A decade ago, congress passed the “Professional Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, which provided remedies to the state to enforce child support orders. It was not based upon empirical knowledge but upon propagandistic politics. The act provided for a Child Support Enforcement Unit and also mandated that data collection and retrieval be created to track support compliance. If done, the state receives a bribe from the Federal Government to run the program. The state legislature, in lockstep with their Federal masters, enacted legislation, not based upon evidence, but upon the mythology of the deadbeat father, and welfare Cadillac mothers. So, in order to collect support orders and obtain re-imbursement welfare benefits on behalf of the State, whose agencies are supposed to help the needy instead of acting like a collection agency, the legislators decided to revoke licenses issued by the State. How it helps a person pay support by depriving a means of making a living is beyond me, but the vengeful and idiotic congressmen and legislators dictate that the person lose any license issued by the state, including law licenses.
Therefore, even though there is an expensive data base foisted upon the backs or the poor which tracks support payments and compliance with Court orders, this was not used. The Government pays the states to set up this system. I assume it works. Nonetheless, I received a threatening letter from the Attorney Governance group stating that I had not certified that I was in compliance with support orders. She was unable to determine whether or not further proceedings are in order. The letter signed by an attorney, presumably licensed to practice law and who attended law school somewhere. When I went to law school, I was trained to give advice, investigate facts, determine the best interest for the client and for society. Corporate counsel has a further duty to the public or shareholders. A government is a kind of corporation. A lawyer is expected to think, reason, and plan. Anything less than that is not practicing law, but administrating an entity. A lawyer doesn’t blindly follow regulations as did the advocates and judges in Nazi Germany who deported Jews to Auschwitz and similar places. This is generally done by clerical staff at less expense to the taxpayer. A well trained grade school graduate can see if a form is filled out in compliance with rules. This does not necessitate great intellect or thought. What does require some thought is to determine an answer and apply reason and logic.
I was the 4557th lawyer to be registered in Colorado out of tens of thousands. My age is on file. The courts are computerized, listing each and every case any lawyer is a party to, as well as any orders, pleadings, judgments, etc. Regarding child support, there is a register of all parties who owe child support. Had I treated a client as the attorney for Colorado treated her client, I would be sued or even worse. I would have been expected to investigate and find out if there were any judgments or orders, and based upon what I discovered, to take action. Not so our Government lawyer, making much more than a clerk. In the same batch of mail, I received upon my return, there was another letter from the same party stating that she was unable to determine whether or not further proceedings The letter is troubling on several levels. Aside from being insulting, it flails against my training and beliefs as a lawyer. First, unlike those trained in Napoleonic law, I was trained to function subject to a constitution. I was trained to give a person the benefit of a doubt and not to automatically assume someone is out to cheat, injure or steal. I have practiced law for over 40 years, run for public office, been a judge, taught at a university, was on five Ph.D. dissertation committees and not exactly unknown to officials. My wife’s ancestors include a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and mine, in addition to a King of England, include judges, bishops, and a Judiciare for the Crown. Tradition in my family is strong.
I have also been an admirer of Chief Justice William Douglas, who at age 64 married a 23-year-old. He was a better man than I. Although I would be flattered to be named in a paternity action, I know that this would be impossible, and I only took biology in high school. I want to say in passing that had any of my students shown such lack of intellect, I would have been tempted to fail that student. There are several pages pertaining to me on the internet. Yet, I was requested to submit a sworn statement with a notary seal attached, why I didn’t fill out a form question which, in addition to being insulting, is un-necessary. If no answer was given, then I will be disbarred. As a matter of principle, I cannot participate in such an inane exercise. As an educator, I can’t continence stupidity, ignorance or laziness. As a lawyer, I can’t agree with the Napoleonic concept or innate guilt and lack of a presumption of innocence. As a taxpayer, I cannot stand such a waste of resources by someone paid by my tax moneys and registration fees. Maybe if some of these lawyers started using common sense instead of blindly following like lemmings, we would not have the highest incarcerate rate in the world and rank as low in various area as we do. In any event, dear readers, expect me to go from the label of retired lawyer to retired disbarred lawyer.
Finally, I have belonged to a group since I started doing peer review for an international drug policy journal. I joined this group after reviewing an article by a Brit regarding policy based legislation. The rest of the world has rules that policy legislation must be based upon empirical evidence. Here in this country, legislation is based upon image and propaganda.
I have been a member of an international group promoting empirical based legislation for years. I have also been an educator and the University level. I can’t in good conscience give a response to the threat from the Attorney General’s office. Remember, this is the same office that covered up the perjury and incompetence of the head of the State Forensic Lab and still uses false information in training manuals for police officers in the Attorney General controlled police academy. I would have thought that being a member of the profession for 40 deserves a modicum of respect instead of insult and accusation. The following is a copy of the letters to me.
Jlation Counsel Funk
L..1 11 1 rlUU.;’.)Ul l
April M. I
Alai Timothy Katrin Miller Catherin
Attorneys’ Fund for Client Protection
Unauthorized Practice of Law
l?ebruary 11, 2016
Dennis l. Blewitt 5019 Holmes Pl.
Boulder, C0 .80303
Re: Req uest for Investigation filed by ARC, 16-372
Dear Mr. Blewitt:
The Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel has been notified that your 2016 Attorney Registration information indicated that you are in non-compliance with respect to child support orders. Please see C.R.C.P. 227 and C.R.S. § 26- 13-126(3).
I am unable to determine whether further proceedings pursuant to C.R.C.P.
251. 10 are appropriate. Therefore, please give me your position in this matter in writing within ten (10) days of the date of this letter. Please include the following information with supporting documentation:
- location of court and case name and number in which child support was awarded;
- nature and amount of child support arrearages;
- status of any motions or orders regarding child support arrearages, including any contempt orders; and
4,) the name and telephone number of current opposing counsel, if any, in the domestic relations case or, if there is not counsel, the name, current address, and telephone number of the opposing party.
[f you are not currently obligated under any child support orders, or are in compliance with any and all child support orders and obligation, there is no need to call this office. Simply provide a written statement attesting to same, with your notarized signature, along with a brief explanation as to why your
L Child support order means any administrative or court order requiring the payment of child support, child support iebt, retroactive support, or medical support, whether or not such order is combined with an order for maintenance.
Attorney Registration information indicates otherwise. You will be notified Whether further proceedings must be undertaken.
thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely,
lation Counsel ortimer, Jr.
J.f Geanne F
Alar Timothy Katrin Miller
Dear Mr. Blewitt:
The request for investigation as indicated above has been assigned to me for
review. I note from the file that your response was to be filed with the Attorney regulation Counsel by February 22, 2016, but we have not yet received it.
independent of the disciplinary ramifications of failing to respond to an investigation by Attorney Regulation Counsel, C.R.C.P. 251.8.6 provides for an administrative suspension for the failure to cooperate in an investigation.
Please be advised that if you do not respond with regard to this matter, the investigation will proceed. Moreover, the allegations in the request for investigation will be deemed uncontroverted, with the result that the Attorney regulation Counsel likely will be authorized to prepare and to file a complaint.
further, ·failure- to cooperate can be, in and of itself, grounds for discipline.
ee, C.R.C.P. 251.5.
I will expect to receive your response within ten (1O) days from the date of
Assistant Regulation Counsel
- Posted in: 2d Amendment