Obamacare Provision: ‘Forced’ Home Inspections…Well…Yes and No

innocent family subjected to CPS overreach Photo of a Sacramento couple who had their baby taken away because of an incompetent social worker in CPS.

Does Obamacare force home inspections by the feds on everyone for almost any reason? Some websites claim it does. What the sites are actually referring to is a federal grant to the states and the requirements affixed to it.

The federal government has been using taxpayer grant money to put states more-and-more under the thumb of the federal government.

The grant doesn’t actually force home inspections on everyone but, in the end, it sets another questionable precedent. The intention appears to be to help people and to make certain the money is being used effectively, but good intentions can pave a road to Hell as we all know.

To sum up, states that collect money under an expanded grant must subject more eligible citizens to more home visits. Home visits are sometimes a good thing to help stop fraud.

It does mean that people they target must be visited. How the state chooses to do this depends on them. They can barge in with police or make appointments. In some areas, government agents might need to be accompanied by police. How each state interprets the home visits is critical.

The fact is that the government can force their way into your house now. Click here for one such story or listen to the video.

 

BACK TO THE GRANT REQUIREMENTS

The Federal government added an Obamacare grant program July, 2012 and it was expanded July 2013 to include mandatory home visits. Eligible states must expand their home visiting program in order to collect money under this expanded grant – Maternal Infant and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) program.

The states affected are: Alabama, American Samoa, Alaska, Delaware, Georgia, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, Northern Mariana Islands, Oregon, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Virgin Islands, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.

Modest home visits are out, expansive home visits are in.

According to the HHS website, targets for the home visits are people who are in need of their services and include:

  1. Low-income eligible families.
  2. Eligible families who are pregnant women who have not attained age 21.
  3. Eligible families that have a history of child abuse or neglect or have had interactions with child welfare services.
  4. Eligible families that have a history of substance abuse or need substance abuse treatment.
  5. Eligible families that have users of tobacco products in the home.
  6. Eligible families that are or have children with low student achievement.
  7. Eligible families with children with developmental delays or disabilities.
  8. Eligible families who, or that include individuals who, are serving or formerly served in the Armed Forces, including such families that have members of the Armed Forces who have had multiple deployments outside of the United States.

Areas of emphasis are:

  • Improvements in maternal, child, and family health
  • Effective implementation and expansion of evidence-based home visiting programs or systems with fidelity to the evidence-based model selected
  • Development of statewide or multi-State home visiting programs
  • Development of comprehensive early childhood systems that span the prenatal-through-age-eight continuum
  • Outreach to high-risk and hard-to-engage populations
  • Development of a family-centered approach to home visiting
  • Outreach to families in rural or frontier areas
  • The development of fiscal leveraging strategies to enhance program sustainability

What the government can do with their findings could be cause for concern, but more of a concern is the fact that the government can do anything it wants now.

South Carolina wants to get around the new requirements with a bill but they could also choose to not take the money. How do we get states and politicians to stop biting at the apple?


Ben Swann

Add Comment Register



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *