Arizona rancher LaVoy Finicum told Oregon Public Broadcasting that his four current foster children have been removed while he’s in Oregon: Robert “LaVoy” Finicum and his wife Jeanette were foster care parents for troubled boys. Finicum estimates that over the past decade, more than 50 boys came through their ranch near Chino Valley, Arizona…. That represents an enormous loss of income for the Finicums. According to a 2010 tax filing, Catholic Charities paid the family $115,343 to foster children in 2009. That year, foster parents were compensated between $22.31 and $37.49 per child, per day, meaning if the Finicums were paid at the maximum rate, they cared for, on average, eight children per day in 2009. “That was my main source of income,” Finicum said. “My ranch, well, the cows just cover the costs of the ranch.
I’m not normally one to cast aspersions upon foster parents for the good work they do. I’ve known a few in my time, and to a person they’ve been quality, caring people providing a service I’ll freely admit to being unwilling to do. Fostering children isn’t easy, though the rewards- financial and those more intangible- can be considerable. For whatever reason, there are those willing to take children into their homes and hearts, and while I can’t begin to understand the motivation, it’s a wonderful thing that people like this exist.
That said, there are those for whom “baby farming” is less an altruistic gesture of service than a business venture. People like LaVoy Finicum are among those who have no business being allowed to foster children. I get that he thinks he’s providing a roof and three squares to the children he takes in, and perhaps he is sincere in his belief that what he and his wife do helps children navigate the difficult path to adulthood. That said, children aren’t business transactions. They’re not commodities, entries on a profit and loss statement valued for the income they generate for the host family from the state.
If nothing else, Finicum’s presence at the occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge and his statements about his foster children being removed from his home by the state of Arizona reveal him to be lacking in, if not devoid of, humanity. He’s willing to break the law and openly oppose the federal government, yet he’s upset when that government decides that foster children don’t belong under the care of criminals?
Hypocrisy much? Finicum is quickly becoming a face of the occupier’s “something for nothing” mentality. They have no problem demanding that ranchers be allowed to graze their cattle on federal land without paying grazing fees…yet they and their fellow travelers decry the “free stuff” given to minorities. Finicum wants to be free to break the law and openly defy government while simultaneously continuing to fund his baby farming operation.
I suppose being angry at people getting “free stuff” doesn’t apply if you’re the one benefitting, eh? It’s when other people benefit from government largesse that the righteous outrage gene kicks in.
