Sunday, August 1, 2010

Candidate for Arizona District 3 , American Freedoms opinion why Steve Moak is not the person to represent Arizona. Two reasons not to VOTE for Steve Moak.
Moak Minutes an e-mail missive doesn't tell you how Moak does business or he supports amnesty. "The campaign will tell you he founded a telecommunications firm, but that’s not entirely accurate. He actually owned and sold a large telemarketing firm, Synergy Solutions, the same type that use to harass people at all hours to buy a gym membership or buy a magazine subscription. In fact, telemarketing firms like Steve Moak’s got so bad, the federal government was forced to pass a law outlawing his company’s core business. But what is truly disturbing is was the activities his charity, “notMYkid” was engaged in.
"In a June 23, 2010 panel interview before the Arizona Republic, Moak participated with half of the 3rd District GOP field and was the only candidate on his panel who stood firmly in support of the DREAM (otherwise known as the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors) Act. If Moak is able to win the GOP primary, you can be sure that the recorded position with the Arizona Republic will be used against him by his well-funded Democratic opponent."
According to the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, the legislation Moak supports would “create another type of amnesty by opening a wide path to citizenship for any illegal alien who has entered the country before the age of 16, has been in the country for at least five years, and has earned a high school diploma or GED in the United States.” While Moak indicated unhesitating support for the DREAM Act when asked directly by the Arizona Republic writer, others have been highly critical of its impact. Congressman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) said “The DREAM Act represents a dual assault on law-abiding, taxpaying American citizens and legal immigrants.” The heavy financial and human cost of illegal immigration is obviously very familiar to those of us across Arizona. State and local budgets, health care costs and education costs are being unfairly borne by legal Arizona residents often forced to foot the bill to provide for illegal immigrants. Moak is apparently unmoved by such costs. According to the Heritage Foundation, the legislation that Moak supports would increase that burden because it would allow in-state tuition for illegal aliens and actually repeal a 1996 federal law that prohibits any state from offering in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens unless the state offers in-state tuition rates to all U.S. citizens.
Amnesty by any path is routinely criticized, the idea of providing a simple path to legal status for millions of illegal immigrants across America. Is rewarding criminal behavior and is unfair to those who followed America's immigration law. Critics believe it encourages others to illegally cross the border with the recognition that the prize at the end includes legal status in America for their "anchor babies" children.
Steve Moak not only supports a roundabout pathway to amnesty, he has been less than honest about his much touted philanthropic "Not my Kids."
What's unique about the program is that the president of the company, Steve Moak, has real-life experience behind his products: His son, Steve Moak Jr., is a recovering drug addict and alcoholic. While helping his son overcome his addictions, Moak Sr. co-founded Not My Kid, an organization aimed at preventing substance abuse among children.
Steve Moak founded Not My Kids in Arizona, however what Steve Moak doesn't tell you is he received a $500,000.00 grant from the Helios Foundation  for Not MY Kids. It sounds really noble,to found Not My Kids, but it was actually a slick tax-haven to make even more money for Steve Moak. You see,  He then purchased First Check Diagnostics, LLC a company that sells drug testing kits." When I asked him about making a profit from Not My Kids, he stated he donated the drug testing kits. So while Steve Moak was soliciting millions of dollars in donations for people to help parents with their kid’s drug problems, he actually ended up lining his own considerable pockets.
At First Check  he is listed under Employment History. Do the generous donors that gave money to Moak’s charity know he made a considerable profit when sold the company three years ago off their contributions? My next question was then, you did make a profit off Not MY Kids when you sold the drug testing company, answer yes, but I donated to $250,000.00 to a charitable organization.
My take on being a philanthropist may be naive but I've always thought it was to give back, not to ultimately make a profit.