THE BIDEN INVASION - Health inspections for foreign nationals entering our country illegally have gone out the window. That's enabled the importation of many diseases which affect livestock and other agricultural output, and already these things are happening. Legal immigrants and even returning U.S. citizens must pass these inspections to protect the U.S. food supply. But under Joe Biden's catch-and-release, illegals are exempt from such cumbersome requirements. MONICA SHOWALTER
Saturday, May 2, 2020
THE PARASITE ECONOMY - PARASITES SEIZE WAGES, BANK ACCOUNTS SO THE POOR ONLY GET POORER
U.S. hospitals are in the
spotlight for being on the frontline of fighting the pandemic. But in the
shadows, debt collection operations continue, often by the same institutions
treating coronavirus patients, all while unemployment and uncertainty soar.
by Alec MacGillis
April 28, 2:05 p.m. EDT
Is the United States Prepared
for COVID-19?
ProPublica is a nonprofit
newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest
stories as soon as they’re published.
Darcel Richardson knows she’s
fortunate in one sense: She still has her job as a vocational counselor in
Baltimore. But despite that, she won’t be able to make her rent payment this
month because she’s not getting her full salary for a while. More than $400 per
biweekly paycheck — about a quarter of her after-tax income — has been siphoned
off by Johns Hopkins University for unpaid medical bills at one of its
hospitals.
Richardson, 60, got word of the
garnishment from her employer just as the coronavirus pandemic was arriving in
full force last month. “My job was going to take the money out. They don’t want
to get in trouble,” she said. “I spoke with our payroll accountant, and the
bottom line was, even though the crisis had begun, they still had to pay my
money to them.”
In a moment when hospitals
nationwide are being heralded for their role at the front lines of fighting the
pandemic, some Americans continue to experience a less favorable side of
hospital operations: aggressive collection for unpaid medical bills, even at a
time when many of the debtors are seeing their income plunge. Debt collection
is occurring on other fronts as well, over unpaid college and bank loans among
others, prompting debates over protecting people’s economic stimulus checks
from collection agencies or suspending garnishments outright. But collection by
the very hospitals that are treating coronavirus patients brings the health and
economic exigencies of the moment into especially stark relief.
In a few cases, hospitals have
brought new cases against former patients in recent weeks, such as in
Wisconsin, where Froedtert Hospital in Milwaukee filed 46 small-claims lawsuits
even after the governor declared a state of emergency on March 12, and other
hospital systems in the state filed dozens more, according to a report by
Wisconsin Public Radio and Wisconsin Watch. Steve Schoof, Froedtert’s director
of external communications, told ProPublica in a statement that the hospital
stopped filing small claims suits on March 18. “Moving forward,” the statement
continued, “Froedtert Health will no longer be filing small claims suits for
medical debt collection. Unfortunately, there was a miscommunication that
resulted in small claims filings after March 18. We immediately rectified this
miscommunication and dismissed these small claims cases that were filed after
March 18.”
Will banks, landlords and other
debt collectors work with people who’ve lost income because of the coronavirus
crisis? Help us find out.
More often, though, the
collection stems from cases filed months before the pandemic arrived, as the
legal process grinds its way forward. “Where debt collection is underway for
pre-COVID medical debt, they will continue to do that,” said Jenifer Bosco, a
staff attorney for the National Consumer Law Center.
In Richardson’s case, the debt
stemmed from a two-day 2018 visit to Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center in
southeast Baltimore, one of a string of medical visits she has had to make over
the years to deal with a knee injury from a fall, a hip injury from a car
accident, hernia repairs and back trouble. She had insurance coverage through
her job, which at the time was with the state Division of Correction, but it
left a balance of almost $1,000 for her to pay. Richardson, who lives by
herself in a modest apartment complex just east of the city, started hearing
from a collections lawyer for Hopkins last fall and tried to work out a payment
schedule with him, but she couldn’t make it work.
“I just didn’t have the money,”
she said. “I said to the lawyer, I might be able to pay an amount monthly, but
when it came time, I just didn’t have it. What can you do when you’re caught
between a rock and a hard place? I prioritize. I’m going to try to pay my rent
first, pay for gas and electric, cellphone costs. And I’ve got to eat.”
The court judgment was finally
entered against Richardson in Baltimore City District Court in January:
$923.21, plus $34 in court costs and $138.49 in attorney’s fees. The notice of
wage garnishment went out on March 6 — the day after Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan
announced the state’s first three coronavirus cases. The garnishment was
confirmed by Richardson’s new employer, the nonprofit drug treatment
organization Gaudenzia, on March 16, the day that Hogan decreed the closure of
all bars, restaurants, gyms and movie theaters, and three days after Richardson
and her colleagues were barred by safety precautions from providing counseling
inside prisons. She now works at a small treatment center that houses seven
women, where social distancing is easier.
Johns Hopkins, by far the
largest private-sector employer in the state and the largest beneficiary of
billionaire Michael Bloomberg’s charitable giving, has long faced scrutiny for
its aggressive collection of medical debt, including from the many low-income
Baltimore residents it serves, who in theory should be able to qualify for the
hospital’s charity care programs. In 2008, The Baltimore Sun reported that
Hopkins and other Maryland nonprofit hospitals had filed more than 32,000
debt-collection suits over the past five years, winning at least $100 million
in judgments. Last May, a coalition that includes the AFL-CIO and National
Nurses United, which has been trying to organize Hopkins nurses, released a
report finding that Hopkins had launched 2,400 lawsuits in Maryland courts
since 2009 against patients with unpaid bills, increasing from 20 in 2009 to a
peak of 535 in 2016.
In response to the 2019 report,
Hopkins officials said they offered considerable free and discounted services,
and that “for patients who choose not to pursue those options or who have a
demonstrated ability to pay, we will make every effort to reach out to them and
to accommodate their schedule and needs. In those rare occasions when a patient
who has the ability to pay chooses not to, we follow our state required
policies to pursue reimbursement from these patients.”
The cases have slowed in pace
but not stopped altogether since the report. Bayview, one of several hospitals
under the Hopkins umbrella, has filed about 60 cases over the past year, according
to Maryland court records. Dozens of them, including Richardson’s, remain open.
Kim Hoppe, vice president for
communications for Johns Hopkins Medicine, said in a statement that after
looking into the matter, the medical system has become aware of nine
garnishments that went into effect in February and March, and that it has now
placed a “hold” on them. “Johns Hopkins remains committed to providing
affordable access to all patients in need of our care, regardless of ability to
pay,” Hoppe said. “We also make numerous efforts to communicate with patients
who have overdue bills. Typically, patients receive more than a dozen contacts
via mail or phone call along with multiple opportunities to file for medical or
financial hardship. At all points in that process, patients are encouraged to
speak with financial counselors; their bills will be forgiven if they can show
financial hardship or inability to pay.”
Politicians have touted debt
relief, but the various proposals are patchwork. Many homeowners and renters
won’t get much help; those struggling with credit card, car and other loan
payments will get none.
For Cheri Long, aggressive
medical debt collection came with less warning than it did for Richardson.
Long, a nurse at an assisted living center in northern West Virginia, had
stopped by a Dollar General on March 23 to pick up some groceries for her kids
and some requests for residents at the center: prunes, caramel candies and
adult diapers. When she went to pay with her debit card, the machine told her she
had insufficient funds. She checked the account after leaving the store and
found there had been a debit for about $900. She assumed her account had been
hacked and the funds would be restored. In fact, the bank told her, her account
had a hold on it from the magistrate court.
She told the bank she had not
received any notification. But that night, a card was waiting in her mailbox
alerting her that there was a certified letter waiting for her at the post
office. She picked the letter up the next day and rushed to the magistrate
court, and she learned that the account had been garnished by West Virginia
University Hospitals, the official name for J.W. Ruby Memorial Hospital, the
large nonprofit academic medical center in Morgantown that is the flagship of
the WVU Medicine system.
The bills were for care
received by her husband, Seth — after a motorcycle accident seven years ago and
after a visit for alcohol rehab after he had started drinking heavily upon
losing his coal mining job three years ago. He had insurance coverage at the
time of both hospital stays, even supplemental motorcycle insurance, but the
coverage had left a balance of about $3,500. Seth had gotten work at another
mine but lost it again two years ago, leaving the family relying on Cheri’s
income, about $3,000 per month in take-home pay. “Times are hard,” she said in
an interview. “That [medical bill] was my last priority. I didn’t think they
would do anything over $3,500.”
The bank garnishment sent her
into a panic. She was in tears at the courthouse, pleading for someone to help
her. She eventually filed for an “affidavit for exemption” through the sheriff,
seemingly got the garnishment lifted temporarily and changed her direct deposit
to another account to be on the safe side. But when she went for groceries
again on April 3, her card was declined. Her account had been zeroed out again
despite the exemption, apparently due to a bureaucratic oversight.
She borrowed money for
groceries and gas from her co-workers, nursing aides who make minimum wage. Her
father-in-law offered to cover the house payment. And, on Easter Sunday, she
started writing emails — to the governor, to the attorney general. “It was a
very depressing time,” she said later. “I’m out working, busting my butt, and
they’re going to take my money.”
At last, she got help. The
National Consumer Law Center put her in touch with a local legal aid lawyer,
Jennifer Wagner with Mountain State Justice. Wagner filed a lawsuit on behalf
of Long, arguing that it was unconstitutional to seize her property when the
closure of the court system undermined her ability to seek due process.
On April 15, Preston County
Judge Steven L. Shaffer issued an emergency order halting seizure of both
Long’s bank account and her imminent stimulus funds, thereby restoring the
money already taken. “Seizure of personal property during the court closure and
stay at home order and related state of emergency ... violates due process of
law,” he wrote in the order, first reported by the Times West Virginian newspaper.
In a statement, WVU Medicine
spokeswoman Angela Knopf said that the system gave guidance to its third-party
collection vendors in March to be mindful of the economic impact of the
pandemic crisis in seeking repayment, but it did not order them to hold back
entirely. “At WVU Medicine, we need to balance our need to liquidate patient
balances with the needs of our community, especially during times of
disruption,” read the guidance. “Collection calls and letters can continue.
However, please take a soft approach to calls and express the compassion that
WVU Medicine has for our community during this difficult time. We do not want
to beat our patients up as they are sequestered in their homes, compounding the
stress of the current situation. We want to be a partner in helping them
through this.” The guidance instructed vendors not to file any new lawsuits for
“at least the next 60 days,” but it does not explicitly address the garnishing
of accounts from cases launched before the crisis.
Wagner, the legal aid lawyer,
said she is getting calls from more than a dozen other people in the area
facing collection from the hospital and is considering filing a class-action
lawsuit over the garnishments. “We’re contemplating seeking broader relief
because of our concerns that they haven’t stopped, notwithstanding the order,”
she said. “It’s actually going to dissuade people from seeking medical care
during a time when it’s really important to seek medical care, and that is
really alarming.”
Governors have issued orders temporarily
banning wage and bank garnishments in several states, including in Illinois,
Massachusetts and Washington. The Texas Supreme Court has decreed that any new
garnishment orders not be served until after May 7. Governors or state
attorneys general have taken the more limited step of barring the seizure of
stimulus checks during bank account garnishments in some other states, among
them California, New York and Ohio. But this leaves several dozen states where
medical debt collection can still carry forward, with or without the ability to
seize stimulus checks in the process.
In recent years, revelations of
aggressive medical debt collection have been especially prevalent in states
that chose not to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, which has left
hospitals with more unreimbursed care than in states that did expand Medicaid.
Kaiser Health News reported on 36,000 lawsuits filed in recent years by the
University of Virginia medical system, most predating the state’s expansion of
Medicaid in 2018, and ProPublica last year reported on 8,300 lawsuits over five
years by Methodist Le Bonheur Healthcare in Memphis, where Tennessee lawmakers
have refused to expand Medicaid. That reporting resulted in a pullback by
Methodist, which announced that, while not altogether abandoning collection
lawsuits, it would expand its financial assistance policy and stop suing its
own employees over medical debts.
Meanwhile, though, another
Memphis hospital, Baptist Memorial, has kept up aggressive collection during
the economic crisis. The Shelby County court system lists about 20 garnishments
for Baptist Memorial debts initiated last month alone, some of them for debts
going back more than a decade.
In Memphis, Methodist Le
Bonheur Healthcare has brought 8,300 lawsuits for unpaid medical bills in just
five years.
One of the Baptist Memorial targets
found out that she was about to have her paycheck garnished for a 13-year-old
debt when she received a letter in the mail from a lawyer seeking to represent
her in the matter. “It’s just been very hard,” said the woman, who asked that
her name not be used. “I had offered a settlement, but they wouldn’t work with
me. They’re playing hardball.”
A Baptist Memorial spokeswoman
said in a written response, “These are not new cases; these judgments were made
months ago. You’re looking at renewals that were filed in January — well before
the first known COVID case was diagnosed in the U.S. If any of these people
lost their jobs, we would stop trying to collect. If they have other financial
issues, they can contact us and we’ll work with them. We have modified payment
plans for hundreds of patients since the COVID pandemic began.”
Critics of the hospital debt
collection say they are aware that hospitals may be more sympathetic creditors
at the current moment, when they are strapped by the demands of treating victims
of the pandemic, while losing much of their usual business. Johns Hopkins, for
one, announced this week that it was running a $100 million deficit, due
largely to a dropoff in the elective medical procedures that provide much of
its revenue base.
But the National Consumer Law
Center notes that hospitals nationwide are receiving $100 billion in the
federal relief packages to help recover some of the costs of the crisis. And
Cecilia Behgam, an AFL-CIO researcher who helped produce the 2019 report on Hopkins,
notes that collection on unpaid bills makes up just a tiny sliver of hospital
revenue — for a giant institution like Hopkins, typically less than one-tenth
of a percent. “This is not making a significant difference in the budget of
these hospitals,” she said.
Behgam also noted that in
cities such as Baltimore and Memphis, the lawsuits and garnishments are being
brought mostly against exactly the demographic that has been shown to be most
vulnerable in the pandemic: lower-income African Americans with underlying
health conditions. “These are people who are already disproportionately feeling
the impact of the epidemic,” she said.
In Baltimore, Darcel Richardson
says she has so far managed to talk the managers of her apartment complex into
letting her pay the outstanding balance of her rent once the garnishments stop.
They might even be willing to cancel the usual fees for late payment, she said.
“I am a firm believer in trusting God,” she said. “He’ll meet my needs. So far,
he’s still kept the roof over my head.”
Wendi C. Thomas contributed
reporting.
Wages Seized. Bank Accounts Frozen. The Poor Are
Getting Poorer as Creditors Pursue Debts
Alana Semuels
Time•May 1, 2020
Cindy Kimbler knows she’s lucky
to have a job right now, especially after being furloughed for a week by her
employer, a thrift store in Grove City, Ohio. But in mid-March, she noticed
something strange. Although she was working her usual hours, putting her health
in danger with every shift, she was making one-third less money.
The reduction amounted to about
$200 a week and was significant, especially since Kimbler only makes $11 an
hour as a cashier. She checked with her payroll department and learned that in
mid-March, a creditor had started garnishing her paychecks. Kimbler, 59, hadn’t
even been aware of the court judgment allowing the wage garnishment to begin.
The debt, she says, is from four years ago, when her car broke down and she got
a payday loan—with an interest rate of around 26%— to fix it.
Even before the coronavirus
sent the economy plummeting, Kimbler had been living paycheck to paycheck. Now,
suddenly, she was in danger of not being able to make rent and possibly being
evicted when the local eviction moratorium lifted. “I thought, ‘I am never ever
going to be able to pay any of my bills with them taking $200 out of my
check,’” she told me recently.
Though some protections exist
for people struggling financially during the COVID-19 pandemic, thanks to the
CARES Act stimulus package signed into law on March 27, they largely ignore
those who were already on the edge of financial ruin. The CARES Act has paused
federal student loan debt payments and payments on federally-backed mortgages,
and various cities and states have suspended evictions. But few states have stopped
creditors from moving ahead with wage garnishments, repossessions, and
attachments (one-time seizures of bank accounts). This means that in many
cases, the pandemic will tip people like Kimbler, who was barely getting by,
into an economic abyss from which it will be difficult or impossible to
recover. Even the one-time $1,200 stimulus payments promised to millions in the
U.S. can be garnished by financial institutions in many states.
“This is crippling people right
now,” says Melissa Linville, an attorney at the Legal Aid Society of Columbus.
“Some courts are carrying on as if there is no pandemic.”
And with parts of the country
starting to reopen to business, sending a message that it’s time to rev up the
economy, legal advocates see little chance of new restrictions to protect the
poorest sector of society. That means a likely rise in consumer bankruptcies as
individuals see no way to escape their debts.
“Things were bad before the
COVID emergency, they got worse with COVID, and they’re going to get even
worse,” says Margot Saunders, senior counsel at the National Consumer Law
Center.
***
Garnishments can occur after a
creditor obtains a court judgement against someone who owes them money. Some
people are not aware of the court hearings, often because they have not been
informed by the creditor and don’t show up to argue their cases. Kimbler says
that’s what happened to her. But once a court gives the go-ahead, creditors are
free to take a portion of a person’s wages from their paycheck. A separate order
allows them to seize money from an individual’s bank account. Federal law
requires that debtors are left with at least $217.50 a week in take-home
pay—for a family of four, that’s less than half the federal poverty level. Some
states protect more income from creditors, but creditors aren’t limited to
targeting money. They are free to seize cars, even if a debtor needs a vehicle
to get to work to earn the money to pay off their debts.
About one-third of Americans
have debts in collection, according to the National Consumer Law Center. Total
household debt reached an all-time high in the last quarter of 2019, at $14.5
trillion, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
Unemployment checks are
supposed to be protected from creditors, but even they are at risk of seizure
once they are deposited into bank accounts. To protect their benefits, debtors
must file a court motion, which is challenging in scores of jurisdictions where
the coronavirus has closed most courts. People who do succeed in filing motions
are being told they must wait weeks and sometimes months for their cases to be
heard. In the meantime, the funds remain frozen. “I really worry that these
creditors will use this delay to get debtors to pay them money they don’t have
the right to,” says Alex Kornya, litigation director of Iowa Legal Aid. Before
the pandemic, Iowa judges would hear exemption cases within a week; now,
clients’ hearings are being scheduled two or three months from now, he says.
Cindy Kimbler outside her place
of work, the Volunteers of America store, in Grove City, Ohio on April 25,
2020. Kimbler received help from the Legal Aid Society of Ohio after
debt-collectors started garnishing her wages in March. | James D.
DeCamp—JamesDeCamp.com
In Wisconsin, people who
receive food stamps can file a document arguing they are exempt from wage
garnishment, says Karen Bauer, a staff attorney at the Legal Aid Society of
Milwaukee. But creditors are trying to make people go to court to prove they get
food stamps, and so the garnishments are continuing. “We’re seeing a lot of
issues with people just trying to protect the money that was supposed to be
there to protect them,” she says.
Garnishments are also coming
from the U.S. Department of Education, even though Secretary of Education Betsy
DeVos announced on March 25 that the department would halt collection actions
and wage garnishments for 60 days beginning March 30. Andrew Orlandini, 52, a
military veteran who works at a hazardous waste disposal company in Milwaukee,
has had his wages garnished weekly because of a $13,000 student loan debt,
despite the DeVos directive. Orlandini says his employer won’t stop garnishing
until it receives a letter from the DOE instructing it to do so. (Employers
risk violating a state court order if they don’t comply with a garnishment). A
spokesman for Ascendium, the company that is garnishing Orlandini’s wages on
behalf of the Department of Education, says the action should have stopped.
It’s possible the employer or collections agency missed the notice to halt
garnishments, he says, and he pledged to look into Orlandini’s case.
In mid-April, U.S. Senator Cory
Booker and Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley, along with 30 colleagues, wrote a
letter rebuking the Trump administration for allowing garnishments to continue
for federal student loans. And on May 1, the National Consumer Law Center, in
partnership with other groups, announced a class action lawsuit against DeVos
and the Department of Education demanding an immediate halt to garnishments of
student borrowers. The lead plaintiff is a home health aide whose hours have
been reduced during the pandemic and who has no money in her bank account, but
whose paychecks are still being garnished.
Volunteers distribute eggs from
the Second Harvest Food Bank of Central Florida to needy families at a drive
through event on April 17, 2020 in Kissimmee, Florida. | Paul
Hennessy—NurPhoto/Getty Images
Many states and local
governments are still garnishing wages and collecting outstanding debts from
court fees and fines, including traffic tickets, according to Joanna Weiss, the
co-director of the Fines and Fees Justice Center in New York. Though some
states like Delaware and California have suspended the active collection of
payment for criminal, civil, and traffic violations, others are still sending
collection notices, revoking driver’s licenses, and in some cases, jailing
people who fall behind on fees.
After Reunca Lewis was pulled
over on April 17, a Friday, because her car was missing a license plate, she
told me she spent the weekend in a cramped jail cell in Alabama with six other
women. Like her, all of them were there for unpaid traffic tickets. Lewis, 23,
doesn’t deny that she’d fallen behind on paying traffic tickets, something the
officer who pulled her over quickly discovered, but Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey on
March 13 had directed law enforcement to issue summons or citations when
possible in light of the pandemic. “The condition of jails inherently heightens
the possibility of COVID-19 transmission,” Ivey’s proclamation read.
Nevertheless, Lewis says she was handcuffed as her 6-year-old son watched and
taken to jail, where it was too crowded to keep a safe distance from her
cellmates.
“It was just mind-blowing that
all of us were in there for traffic tickets,” she says.
A few states have acted to
protect indebted consumers. Virginia suspended new garnishment orders and has
allowed consumers to attend remote hearings to seek exemptions from previous
orders. Illinois suspended wage garnishments while the state is under a
gubernatorial disaster proclamation. Texas suspended all service of new
garnishments until May 7. Washington, D.C. prevented creditors from initiating,
threatening, or acting upon a garnishment. But none of these orders suspend old
garnishments, and only Virginia provides a way for clients to quickly file for
exemptions.
Twenty-five state attorneys
general wrote a letter to Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin on April 13 asking
that the Treasury take action to prevent stimulus payments from garnishment,
but the Treasury has not acted. A transcript of a Treasury Department call with
financial institutions obtained by The American Prospect indicates that the
department told banks that there was no law that prevented them from seizing
stimulus payments, which some critics saw as de facto permission to seize the
money. The National Consumer Law Center has been advocating for an amendment to
the CARES Act that would treat stimulus payments like government benefits such
as Social Security, which creditors are not allowed to seize.
***
Even if an amendment were to
pass, it would not help the people who’ve resorted to bankruptcy in the face of
persistent debt. Stephania Fredericksen, a 36-year-old artist, took that step
after she was served with a debt collection lawsuit on March 26 over unpaid
student loans. Fredericksen says she had been catching up on payments until the
pandemic hit. Art fairs were canceled and tourism slowed in her hometown,
Charleston, SC, and her income dried up. “I was just catching up again, just
gathering speed, and now this,” Fredericksen says.
She went onto Upsolve, a
nonprofit website that allows low-income consumers to file for bankruptcy, and
filled out the paperwork. Upsolve CEO Rohan Pavuluri says the majority of
people coming to Upsolve now are those whose finances were affected by
COVID-19.
Upsolve can’t help everyone–it
is only for people who have simple Chapter 7 bankruptcy cases and who satisfy a
host of other requirements. People must answer hundreds of questions to figure
out if they qualify. Fortunately for Fredericksen, she did, but Saunders, of
the National Consumer Law Center, worries that the increased cost of filing for
bankruptcy and the excessive paperwork, the result of a massive bankruptcy
reform in 2005, will prevent people from exercising that option. There will
also be delays in filing because many courts are still closed.
Many consumers may be waiting
to file bankruptcy until they hit bottom and realize the depth of their
financial hole. They may also be worried about filing too soon, because of the
requirement that eight years pass between Chapter 7 filings. If they fall
deeper into debt shortly after one Chapter 7, they’ll have to wait a long time
before seeking this relief again.
Cindy Kimbler, the Ohio
cashier, didn’t want to wait. Once the creditor started garnishing her wages,
she started calling bankruptcy attorneys to figure out her options. The private
lawyers quoted costs starting at $1,500—money she didn’t have—so she contacted
the Legal Aid Society of Columbus, which is now helping her file for
bankruptcy. The lawyers there have been able to stop the garnishing of
Kimbler’s wages, and the organization only asked that she pay the $350 in court
filing fees.
“I’m just looking forward to
getting my life back on track,” says Kimbler. For the first time in a long
time, Kimbler is optimistic about her financial future, and that makes her a
rarity in America today.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment