Illinois’ Example of “ObamaCare” ? – Chicago Style

It seems the State of Illinois, especially Cook County has been hiring convicted criminals and ex-cons to babysit !!!

Could this be an “experiment” in ObamaCare ?

Cornelius Osborne may not seem like baby-sitting material.

He was convicted of raping two women. A succession of felonies, from robbery to failing to register as a sex offender, repeatedly sent him to prison, state records show.

But over more than two years, the state paid Osborne nearly $5,000 to baby-sit two children, before his latest conviction — for dealing drugs — put him back behind bars.

WELL how did this bonehead get out of prison in the first place ?

Not to mention HOW he got the job application either ?

Oh wait, I forgot, it's Chicago.

Osborne, of Chicago, wasn't the only sex offender paid by taxpayers to baby-sit, according to a Tribune investigation that found cases of convicted rapists, molesters and other violent felons given access to children over the past decade. The money comes from a $750 million-a-year program that subsidizes child care for more than 150,000 impoverished Illinois families.

[color=limegreen]The state Department of Human Services poorly vetted baby sitters for years — and when a 2009 law forced better checks, it took nearly 18 months to start them, the newspaper's investigation of the Child Care Assistance Program found.

^^^^ THAT's the understatement of the century Watson !!

Also, despite the reforms, the Tribune found that even now the state lacks safeguards to weed out baby sitters who watch children while living in the homes of sex offenders and other felons deemed too dangerous. Based on those findings, the state is vowing further reforms.

[color=limegreen]It's nearly impossible to determine just how many of the illegal baby-sitting arrangements the state has allowed. The newspaper found no cases where children were harmed, although privacy laws shield data needed to do an in-depth study.

Still, the Tribune's findings are frustrating to Sen. Matt Murphy, R-Palatine, who pushed for the reforms mandating better checks to weed out illegal arrangements.

Does anyone think that the State agency workers themselves may be criminals too !!!

But then again, maybe these kind of babysitters are needed to sit for children of people in jail (or soon to be) … gives it that “at home feeling” !!

That must be it.

and YES, make sure the "privacy laws" are intact and fully enforced !!!!

After all, "privacy" protects the "Innocent", and of course is

"for your protection as well as ours"

hey wait .... how did they find out about this guy then ? Must have been a "breach of privacy" !!

I think Cornelius may have merit for a lawsuit !!!



Sex offenders paid to baby-sit !


and it gets better !!

....The program has long barred those convicted of sex crimes and the most violent felonies. But Osborne wasn't spotted because of how the form was filled out. It asked him if he had been convicted of any crimes and, if so, which ones. [color=limegreen]His response showed "drug trafficking" — a crime that at the time didn't disqualify him.

He didn't mention the prison stints for rape, robbery and kidnapping, which would have.

And there's no record anyone checked further.

[color=limegreen]At the time, the state trusted Osborne and tens of thousands of other applicants to be honest.

…"He didn't mention the prison stints for rape, robbery and kidnapping,

Well I wouldn't have mentioned that either !!!

reply to post by xuenchen

Finally, someone that is not a complete idiot.

I have been reading a flood of things here on ATS lately about how all the criminals are people too and noone should be able to violate their rights and how they should be afforded the same opportunities as everyone else. WELL to all those people what about the OPs point. How would you like it if you found out your babysitter was a sex offender and a rapist? I try not to troll but if you dont care you are either the biggest idiot in history or you have no love for your own children. IMO

Six percent of the population were convicted felons 10 years ago. One percent of the population are in prison, that's nearly 20 million people in total.

20 million people

That means about one in ten people you see throughout the day were at one time in prison for a felony.

An 18 year old can become a sex offender for life for having sex with a 17 year old, also a rapist.
Anyone can be convicted of aggravated assualt if they can't prove self defense.

ATS amazes me at times, where some can decry a police state while others can be outraged at the employment of a convicted criminal.

Originally posted by links234
Six percent of the population were convicted felons 10 years ago. One percent of the population are in prison, that's nearly 20 million people in total.

20 million people

That means about one in ten people you see throughout the day were at one time in prison for a felony.

An 18 year old can become a sex offender for life for having sex with a 17 year old, also a rapist.
Anyone can be convicted of aggravated assualt if they can't prove self defense.

ATS amazes me at times, where some can decry a police state while others can be outraged at the employment of a convicted criminal.

good point, but it's generalized.

The 1 in 10 people you see throughout the day would depend heavily on WHERE you go !

If you are in a, let's say, upper middle class neighborhood, that number might be lower.

If you are in a "low-income" urban neighborhood, the number might be higher.

again, good point, but that's no excuse for state government agencies to overlook violent crimes against other people - the victims, and THEN spend the taxpayers money on support of criminals in sensative jobs that some actually require a license.

Would you or anyone else choose a baby sitter from the crowd that just got released from Cook County Jail today ? Maybe, maybe not, PROBABLY NOT !! The government is paid to make sure this does not happen.
Unfortunately, the gov has made a choice FOR YOU, not BY YOU. !!!!!!!!


i wonder how much tax was paid by the criminals compared to their victims tax payments ?



The Chicago Tribune ran this article the same day as the OP article !!

Irony on Aug 28th !

State-subsidized baby-sitting means Illinois keeps an eye on who's watching the kids

State will start checking addresses against sex-offender registry......

Under the program, states get to pick who can't baby-sit. Illinois bars for life those convicted of sex crimes, violent felonies and drug felonies, administrators said, along with people listed in a state child-welfare database as having abused or neglected a child.

My guess is that there has been some corruption and payoffs ..... $$ $$

Just so we are clear, the state doesn't interview and hire these people directly....most of the times these individuals are family members or friends of the family who the FAMILY hires and is just paid through state welfare benefits...

I dont see how IL or cook county is responsible, yes there should be a checks and balances system to weed these people out but dont make it seem like these baby sitters just showed up to a job fair and got a job baby sitting random kids.

Let me get this right, the welfare system pays families to hired "felons" that happen to be "family or friends" to babysit so the parents can work, right?, so like that the state can claim that is "creating" jobs, so it looks on the states and the nations unemployment numbers, but the money doesn't come from the earnings in the private sector, but from tax payers.

So, in other words the government is subsidizing employment with tax payer to make numbers look better. but is not saving a penny to the tax payer at all.

Originally posted by Krystian
Just so we are clear, the state doesn't interview and hire these people directly....most of the times these individuals are family members or friends of the family who the FAMILY hires and is just paid through state welfare benefits...

I dont see how IL or cook county is responsible, yes there should be a checks and balances system to weed these people out but dont make it seem like these baby sitters just showed up to a job fair and got a job baby sitting random kids.

Yes,

this is pretty clear from the OP article:

[color=limegreen]The state Department of Human Services poorly vetted baby sitters for years — and when a 2009 law forced better checks, it took nearly 18 months to start them, the newspaper's investigation of the Child Care Assistance Program found.

....The program has long barred those convicted of sex crimes and the most violent felonies. But Osborne wasn't spotted because of how the form was filled out. It asked him if he had been convicted of any crimes and, if so, which ones. [color=limegreen]His response showed "drug trafficking" — a crime that at the time didn't disqualify him.

He didn't mention the prison stints for rape, robbery and kidnapping, which would have.

And there's no record anyone checked further.

[color=limegreen]At the time, the state trusted Osborne and tens of thousands of other applicants to be honest.

Then WHO was/is "responsible" ?

"Private corrupt, paid-off contractors maybe

Originally posted by marg6043
Let me get this right, the welfare system pays families to hired "felons" that happen to be "family or friends" to babysit so the parents can work, right?, so like that the state can claim that is "creating" jobs, so it looks on the states and the nations unemployment numbers, but the money doesn't come from the earnings in the private sector, but from tax payers.

So, in other words the government is subsidizing employment with tax payer to make numbers look better.

but is not saving a penny to the tax payer at all.

Great Point marg !!!!

YES, that's how they do it, in part at least !!!!

I guess the joke's on us !! in part at least !!!!

its a wonderful day today !

Everything in life is a giant scam, every business out there has loopholes to make it seem better on paper, the state is ran as such too. The money these people make for baby sitting is taxed and they do get a 1040 so yes on paper it looks like a job. The money is coming directly from the state as part of the welfare program so in turn we are inflating our own numbers...

Same goes for unemployment - Once unemployment runs out, whether the person found a job or not they then no longer fall into any category, be it employed or unemployed, once again skewing the numbers s we often see media say assumptive things such as 10,000 new jobs where created, well no thanks tot he loophole 10,000 people just ran out of unemployment insurance and now have no income at all...

I blame municipalities being run as a business - The same reason some police officers have a "budget" to hit an amount of money fined.