The following post discusses the criminals who abuse the ObamaPhone program, however, the money lost in this program will be chump change when you look at the programs under ObamaCrapCare. Dollars will flow out like Niagara Falls!
Take one part of the program for an example. In the first year of ObamaCrapCare, there will be no income verification. This means that someone who earns $500,000 can claim they earn only $15,000 and get their insurance basically free. How many people will take advantage?
There will be some that say, "hey, I would never lie about my income." It would be wonderful if everyone felt the same way, however, the ObamaPhone Program provides evidence that those feelings are far from universal.
What would happen if the IRS would actually monitor the income? The worst case would be that the person who under-reported their earnings would have to return the money that the government gave their insurance company. Not really a big down side. What if the IRS did not catch up with you for ten years and all you had to do was to pay back the last three years? Not a bad penalty!
This one tiny example is how bad this program really is. It needs to be defunded and return the choice of health insurance to the individual.
Conservative Tom
Journalist to Newsmax: 'Obamaphone' Program Filled With Abuse
Friday, 02 Aug 2013 06:21 PM
"What I find scandalous is I'm not eligible [under the guidelines]. … You're supposed to either be on welfare or earn what's less than 136 percent of the poverty level," Jillian Melchior, a National Review columnist, told David Nelson, guest host of "The Steve Malzberg Show" on Newsmax TV.
"I can support a family of eight on my income … [but] it was easy for me to get not one phone, but three."
Melchior decided to probe Lifeline after she heard stories of fraud and abuse associated with the program, which allows the underprivileged to have a way of communicating.
She said she was approached by various Lifeline vendors who barely checked out her eligibility. Even when she told them she was not on welfare, they still qualified her.
"They'd say, are you on welfare? I'm not on welfare, and based on my income level, I don't qualify for this program. So I tell them that, I say 'I'm not on welfare but I'd sure like to be, who wouldn't?'" she said.
"And that was enough to get them to sign me up and I was able to get three Obama phones in the mail. … You're only supposed to have one cellphone per household."
Melchior believes the huge profits that phone-service providers get from the program make the companies less stringent in checking on the recipients of the phones.
"For each person that gets signed up, phone providers get about $10 a month, per customer. That's a lot of money, that adds up fast," she said.
"The problems began when the federal government got in the cellphone business, and when the cellphone business supposedly got into the business of verifying who's on welfare and who's not. That's not the job of either of them. It's not really surprising that we have problems," she said.
Melchior takes issue with the program for claiming the phone giveaways are welfare for the poor.
"It really is corporate welfare. Big corporations are benefiting from this. Meanwhile, taxpayers are funding it and they're suffering," she said.
"It's a program that was created to benefit the poor but has gotten totally out of control."
© 2013 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
You wrote, "Take one part of the program for an example. In the first year of ObamaCrapCare, there will be no income verification."
ReplyDeleteThat was partially true, but no longer true at all. This is why you need to watch the hearing on CSPAN. Get up-to-date information. Cohen testified that they will do 100% income verification. They will use Equifax plus last year's IRS filings. If there is a discrepancy between them, they will then require the individual to submit pay-stubs to verify income. Any overpayment will be clawed back by IRS when the person files their tax return in April.
--David
If you want to really get paranoid, get a piece of software called "Little Snitch!". It will tell you every time someone is secretly intercepting something sent from your computer. It also let you block them. For example, I just found out (for sure) that Google collects everything you and I write on this blog. I could have blocked them, but what's the use?
ReplyDelete--David
Hilarious that the Newsmax people choose the name "Obamaphone" for a program that has been in law since 1995.
ReplyDeleteFrom the USAC annual report for 2012...
The Lifeline Program focused on implementing the FCC’s Lifeline Reform Order released in February that comprehensively reformed the universal service programs for carriers serving low-income consumers.
Among other things, the FCC directed USAC to continue in-depth data validations (idvs) to check for duplicate Lifeline subscribers and create a National Lifeline Accountability Database (NLAD) for eliminating and preventing duplicative support. idvs and the national database represent measures by the FCC and USAC to reduce the size of the program and mitigate potential waste, fraud, and abuse of program funds.
usAc started idvs in certain states in 2011 and in 2012 analyzed over 12 million subscriber records. These reviews required carriers to de-enroll nearly 1.1 million subscribers from the program and resulted in nearly $128 million in annual net savings.
USAC worked with FCC staff to issue a procurement to select a vendor to build the NLAD. The database will serve to ensure that consumers receive only appropriate Lifeline Program support by allowing authorized users, including carriers and states, to determine if a prospective consumer already is enrolled in the program.
use the eAsy button
CHaLLenge
With so many criteria for eligibility, people who could be eligible for funding were getting lost while trying to navigate through a lot of information.
SoLution
We created the Lifeline Pre-Screening Tool that helps individuals determine whether they are eligible for the program.
imPaCt
The tool breaks down Lifeline Program eligibility criteria into digestible parts and walks the individual through the process, step by step.
usAC innovAtion
liFeline pRogRAm • univeRsAl seRvice AdministRAtive compAny 9
$0.82B
$1.03B
$1.32B
In addition, USAC implemented numerous FCC changes affecting consumer eligibility and enrollment. These include limiting Lifeline Program support to one account per household, extending the existing federal default eligibility criteria nationwide, requiring that carriers verify a consumer’s eligibility before enrollment, and obtaining an annual certification confirming that the consumer remains eligible.
For example, USAC developed a one-per-household worksheet for the Lifeline Program to help carriers and consumers determine whether more than one household resides at a single address. The worksheet must be completed when a new applicant applies for Lifeline Program support at an address where there is already a Lifeline subscriber.
The Lifeline Reform Order also established a low income broadband pilot program set to start in 2013 that will use about $14 million of the nearly $200 million in expected savings brought on by the reforms. The pilot program is designed to explore ways to increase broadband adoption among low- income consumers and to collect valuable, real-world data to help the FCC determine how to increase broadband adoption.
--David
There are numbers of studies that show that the ObamaPhone program is full of fraud. We will see if the "reforms" really take place--you must remember, these all are Obama/Demoncratic voters so how strong will the actions be?
ReplyDeleteUSAC is an independent contractor with the government -- not affiliated with either political party. Their reforms of the program are in response to directives from the FCC. Like other corporate annual reports, theirs was audited by an independent accounting firm.
ReplyDeleteAs far as voting, many Republican voters formerly in the middle class have now fallen into the Romney 47% and become eligible for this program. In fact, anybody on SNAP is eligible. I should also remind you that extremely poor people in this country generally do not vote in elections at all. Of those who do, it is rational to vote against Republicans (Ryan budget cuts $135 billion for their food). The SNAP program is not welfare for the poor. It is corporate welfare for corporations like Wal-Mart and McDonald's who pay their employees poverty wages. If we raised the minimum wage in this country, these corporations -- rather than the government -- would be paying for the food for these working poor. Have you EVER considered that?
--David