Food Stamp outrage

[AllieBaba]

The FS system is not meant to MAKE YOU FEEL NORMAL. It's not meant to KEEP UP WITH THE (self supporting) Joneses. It's meant as a last ditch safety net to keep people from starving on the fucking street. You don't need to eat Pringles to keep from starving. Your self esteem is not the factor that FS is meant to maintain. Hell, if ANYTHING that SHOULD be the motivation to get the fuck OFF OF FOODSTAMPS. Making you feal good about your failure as a fuckng parent IS NOT BILLABLE TO THE TAX PAYING PUBLIC. Ou want a fucking ribeye? You want some goddamn lobster? Caviar? Kobe Beef and gold plated fucking ice cream? find a way to pay for it without using tax based food stamps. You can live on generic cost cutter brand macaronni and white label peanut butter until you get better income (that is not tax based).


and yes, because you take this money from tax payers it IS our business how you spend it.

It's meant to keep kids from starving. Period. Who the hell are you to add a bunch of addendums to how ppl should act, what they should do, how they should spend, when they receive fs? Because they aren't there in the fs laws now. So all you're doing is being a judgmental prick.

You're a dildo with power issues, that's who you are. You'd rather waste money on forced drug testing, allow less money to actually go into the fs program, which is the only truly successful welfare program IN EXISTENCE, see kids starve, than not be able to control every step that someone who is on food stamps makes.

It probably makes you feel more important.

Indeed. KEEP KIDS FROM STARVING. Tell me, baba, do your kids NEED to eat fucking lobster in order to keep from starving? NO? ok then.

Who the hell are WE? WE are the tax payers who fund the fucking FS program. If you want to start shelling out the funds then step on up. You won't find a single tax payer who will insist on paying the tab. And yes, if you receive money from taxes then you probably should go on a spending spree at the mall. CRAZY CONCEPT, i know.


And baba.. YOUR INCOME is the product of this fucking program so spare me your criticism when we all know that your own fucking livelihood DEPENDS on unfettered abuse of the tit sticking out of your mouth, ok?

Hey, dumbshit, I'm a tax payer. So I guess that means I can determine what I do and how FS recipients. And since I also am a caseworker, I get to actually apply that.

You don't. Unless you get a job with the state. And when you do, you won't answer to the taxpayers but to your supervisor, dumbshit. Every asshole with a power issue and resentment issues on the street doesn't get to take me aside and tell me I work for them. When they do I tell them to fuck off and die.

And my income doesn't depend upon abuse, dumbass (I can't say that enough, dumbass). The fact that I have an income is in part due to the fact that the FOOD STAMP PROGRAM is a SUCCESSFUL fucking program. The money goes where it's supposed to go. Instead of paying a fortune for labs to draw blood and collect piss from the millions of people who benefit from foodstamps, the money actually goes to those people.

What is your fucking problem with poor kids eating like normal kids? Honestly, I just don't know that many fs recipients dining on lobster every night. But if they have $60 at the end of the month and want lobster, fuck you, they are welcome to it. It's good for them, it's good for the stores, it's good for the economy.

Unlike your petty little "punish the poor and their kids" schemes meant to kill off those pesky poor folks, and funnel money that should be used to improve their lives into beaurocratic limbo and the fucking medical field.

 

[AllieBaba]

Holy crap! You are a liberal, after all!

You'd rather waste money than see it used to help people.

Good for you!

 

[Peejay]

Uh.....OK dude.

I'm gonna go get high, on some food stamp weed and play my thousand dollar guitar. Let me know when they start drug testing so I can drink some water before I go in for my test.

 

[Shogun]

Please, run to Ole trusty and tell me that I don't know what i'm talking about.

OK. You don't know what you're talking about.

Pre-employment drug testing
This is by far the most common type of drug test used by businesses, however, it is also the least effective. It is considered to be an "intelligence test" by drug testing professionals.

However, if the test result of the immunoassay and GC-MS are positive, the MRO contacts the employee and tries to determine if there is any legitimate reason for the employee to have a positive result such as a medical treatment or prescription. However, this is problematic for several reasons. First, most employees are not chemists, and are not aware of which substances which might create a false positive test result. Without such knowledge, they may not mention them, leading to the incorrect reporting of a positive result. Furthermore, non-drug users whose results are reported as positive will have no explanation for the error, and will therefore be reported as drug users. Conversely, drug users may understand that they will only be called if the result is positive, and therefore will tell the MRO that they have been cooking with hemp oil, drinking coca tea, or other plausible explanation for the result. If the MRO determines that the positive result may be due to drug use, the MRO then informs the employer of the positive result. Statistics show that about 5% of the urine samples tested in the U.S. turn out positive for drugs.

There are effective drug testing metods available but the most common testing, used by employers, the testing that is affordable and would be the only affordable method for a food stamp program, isn't reliable.

Again, how much money do you think we should spend to hold onto maybe 5% of food stamps ? And if we did, do you think there is anyone else in line that wants that 5% and will get it ? You know, kind of like employment testing, the job doesn't disappear, someone else gets it. Payroll doesn't go down and you're paying for drug testing too.

Drug users don't endanger anyone by using food stamps, where as drug users in some work place settings do. The reasons for using test here are very different. One may actually produce a result, a safer work place. The other won't show a net gain of anything. Food stamp roles won't go down and neither will drug use and the cost of the test will show no results.

And what does music have to do with any of this ?

Not only that, but the fs program is in place to KEEP THE CHILDREN OF THOSE WHO ARE INCAPABLE OF SUPPORTING THEM FROM STARVING. Is this really too hard a concept to figure out, Shoog? They are required to participate in job search programs already. To spend money which should be going directly to the stomachs of the poor on something that is sure to dq and reduce the amount of fs the kids of a poor family depend on is ridiculous. The program exists to feed people who, for WHATEVER REASON, cannot feed themselves adequately.

Most of my clients are working poor. They work. But they have issues. Mental health, drug, alcohol, usually in such a convoluted mass you can't tell where any of it originates. You aren't going to make these people better by starving them and their kids. You'll just kill them off. Which is idiotic. If we have the program for those people, then let those people fucking use it. Or get rid of it altogether.

But it's a good program. It's relatively inexpensive, and it does a world of good. So quit obsessing about it. Concentrate on something that really does need fixing.

I tellya! Nothing says "KEEP KIDS FROM STARVING" quite like a fucking Kobe Beef Steak!

your mellodrama isn't convincing. I know exactly what it's like to be a kid whose family is on foodstamps, bitch. The difference between you and I is that I understand the cost of such a program and am not trying to normalize poverty with a middle class self esteem just because we couldn't afford food that didn't come in a yellow box with black lettering.

Again, the MORE excuses you make for abusers the MORE food you take from the mouths of those who actually need it. You want to know what MY family DIDNT do while on FS? Make excuses to get drunk or buy a fucking sack of pot. or, buy an 8 ball of coke OR shoot up some fucking herion. If you want to enable abusers then so be it. LORD fucking knows you have a personal financial reason to see that the status quo remains. Trying to deflect the cancer of a few rotten apples will only spoil the entire goddamn program. Your opinon about the relative cost means two things. Im sure you know what they are.

 

[AllieBaba]

You can always tell when Shogun is losing because he reverts to his "I hate females" gutter shit.

 

[Shogun]

You can always tell when Shogun is losing because he reverts to his "I hate females" gutter shit.

what the fuck are you talking about? Not one single post of mine is gender specific. QUOTE ME, bitch.


Again, if your sole input amounts to a personal job review then you really have nothing else to add to this thread.

 

[Shogun]

You can always tell when Shogun is losing because he reverts to his "I hate females" gutter shit.

here you go, baba.. what poverty stricken food stamp user SHOUILDNT DEMAND a fucking weekly lobster dinner strait from Maine????? Generic food doesn't quell starvation, you know!

 

[AllieBaba]

OK. You don't know what you're talking about.




There are effective drug testing metods available but the most common testing, used by employers, the testing that is affordable and would be the only affordable method for a food stamp program, isn't reliable.

Again, how much money do you think we should spend to hold onto maybe 5% of food stamps ? And if we did, do you think there is anyone else in line that wants that 5% and will get it ? You know, kind of like employment testing, the job doesn't disappear, someone else gets it. Payroll doesn't go down and you're paying for drug testing too.

Drug users don't endanger anyone by using food stamps, where as drug users in some work place settings do. The reasons for using test here are very different. One may actually produce a result, a safer work place. The other won't show a net gain of anything. Food stamp roles won't go down and neither will drug use and the cost of the test will show no results.

And what does music have to do with any of this ?

Not only that, but the fs program is in place to KEEP THE CHILDREN OF THOSE WHO ARE INCAPABLE OF SUPPORTING THEM FROM STARVING. Is this really too hard a concept to figure out, Shoog? They are required to participate in job search programs already. To spend money which should be going directly to the stomachs of the poor on something that is sure to dq and reduce the amount of fs the kids of a poor family depend on is ridiculous. The program exists to feed people who, for WHATEVER REASON, cannot feed themselves adequately.

Most of my clients are working poor. They work. But they have issues. Mental health, drug, alcohol, usually in such a convoluted mass you can't tell where any of it originates. You aren't going to make these people better by starving them and their kids. You'll just kill them off. Which is idiotic. If we have the program for those people, then let those people fucking use it. Or get rid of it altogether.

But it's a good program. It's relatively inexpensive, and it does a world of good. So quit obsessing about it. Concentrate on something that really does need fixing.

I tellya! Nothing says "KEEP KIDS FROM STARVING" quite like a fucking Kobe Beef Steak!

your mellodrama isn't convincing. I know exactly what it's like to be a kid whose family is on foodstamps, bitch. The difference between you and I is that I understand the cost of such a program and am not trying to normalize poverty with a middle class self esteem just because we couldn't afford food that didn't come in a yellow box with black lettering.

Again, the MORE excuses you make for abusers the MORE food you take from the mouths of those who actually need it. You want to know what MY family DIDNT do while on FS? Make excuses to get drunk or buy a fucking sack of pot. or, buy an 8 ball of coke OR shoot up some fucking herion. If you want to enable abusers then so be it. LORD fucking knows you have a personal financial reason to see that the status quo remains. Trying to deflect the cancer of a few rotten apples will only spoil the entire goddamn program. Your opinon about the relative cost means two things. Im sure you know what they are.

You fucking moron. How does providing foodstamps to a family subsidize abuse? I work with child welfare, idiot. And I'm not making excuses for anyone. All I'm saying is if they qualify for foodstamps, assholes like you have no right to tell them WHAT BRAND OF FUCKING FOOD TO BUY. It's none of your business. If you see them beating their kids in the grocery store, feel free to shout at them and call CW. But buying their kids a decorated birthday cake, steak, or fucking mountain dew is NOT ABUSE and is none of your fucking business.

And stop with the noble poor boy shit. My family was poor too, we lived on fucking beans and rice, and my mom worked her ass off, as did all of us kids as soon as we were able to. My family paid enough in taxes to support 10 families on foodstamps from now until the end of fucking time. The fact is, you can't look at someone using an ebt card and buying lobster and just "know" they're abusing the system, asshole.

So quit harassing people in the aisles. You just make the problem worse. And someday you'll come up against the wrong one and she'll drop you where you stand.

 

[Peejay]

Some in Congress have suggested that the Food Stamp Program can be cut this year by targeting “waste, fraud, and abuse.” In fact,

The Food Stamp Program is efficient and effective. Program integrity has improved dramatically in recent years and food stamp error rates are now at an all-time low. USDA data show that over 98 percent of food stamp benefits go to eligible households. The low error rate is a major accomp*lishment for a large benefit program that is administered by thousands of eligi*bil*ity workers in state and local offices across the country.
As the U. S. Government Ac*countability Office (GAO) reported in May 2005, “[t]he pay*ment error rate has fallen each year since 1999 … This decline in the payment error rate has been wide*spread: the rate fell in 42 states and the District of Columbia, and the rates in 18 of these states fell by at least one-third.”
GAO further reported that “[a]lmost two-thirds of the payment errors in the Food Stamp Program are caused by case*workers, usually when they fail to act on new infor*ma*tion or make mistakes when applying program rules.” In addition, the program’s success in serving the working poor contributes in part to its error rate: according to GAO, “managing cases with earnings contributes to payment error in part because case*workers may find it difficult to keep up with frequent changes reported to them.”

Any policies that would significantly reduce food stamp benefit expenditures would have either to eliminate eligibility for various groups of low-income families and individuals or to reduce the already modest benefit amounts. Either approach would cause harm to the low-income households — such as families with children, the elderly, or people with disabilities — who depend upon the Food Stamp Program to help them afford an adequate diet.
The Food Stamp Program’s benefits are already lean. Food stamp benefits average only about $1 per person per meal.

Figure 1






The Food Stamp Error Rate has Reached All-time Lows

Almost ninety-nine percent of food stamp benefits are issued to eligible persons, the vast bulk of whom are children and parents in low-income families, senior citizens, and people with disabilities.

On June 24, the U.S. De*partment of Agricul*ture (USDA) announced that the national combined payment error rate in 2004 reached is sixth consecutive all-time low at just 5.88 percent. Until recently 6 percent was the threshold the Food Stamp Act established for exemplary perfor*mance. An error rate below 6 percent qualified a state for a bonus payment or enhanced funding. Now, because of improved payment accuracy, the national average has exceeded this exemplary level.

Some portray the food stamp “com*bined” error rate as a reflection of the dimen*sion of excessive federal expendi*tures due to er*rors. This is incorrect since the combined error rate in*cludes underpayments that save the Pro*gram money. The USDA issues three separate payment error rates: the overpayment error rate, the underpayment error rate, and the combined payment error rate. The overpayment error rate counts benefits issued to ineligible households as well as benefits issued to eli*gible households in excess of what federal rules provide*. The underpayment error rate measures errors in which eligible, par*ti**cipating households received fewer benefits than the Program’s rules direct. The combined payment error rate is the result of summing (rather than net*ting) the overpayment and underpayment error rates. As GAO notes, “nderpayments represent unintentional financial savings to the federal government.”

In other words, to calculate the combined payment error rate USDA adds together the overpayment error rate, which in 2004 was 4.48 percent nationally, and the underpayment *error rate, which in 2004 was 1.41 percent, to reach a combined error rate of 5.88 percent. The net loss to the federal government, how*ever, from the errors in that state’s program (i.e., the bene*fits lost through over*payments minus those saved by underpayments) would be only three percent.

Finally, since 98 percent of benefits go to eligible households, about half of over*payments result from eligible low-income households getting benefits that are modestly in error, rather than from ineligible households participating.

Relatively few of these errors represent dishonesty or fraud on the part of recipe*ents (for example, recipients lying to eligibility workers to get more food stamps). The overwhelming majority of food stamp errors result from honest mistakes by recipients, eligibil*ity wor*kers, data entry clerks, or com*puter program*mers. In recent years, states have reported that about half of the dollar value of overpay*ments and three-quarters of the dollar value of underpayments were their fault, rather than recipients’ fault. Much of the rest of overpayments resulted from innocent errors by households facing a program with complex rules.

GAO reports that USDA and the states “have taken many approaches to increase*ing food stamp payment accuracy, … includ[ing] practices to improve accounta*bil*ity, perform risk as*sess*ments, implement changes based on such assessments, and monitor program performance.” It found that these practices were “recog*nized as being effective in reducing payment errors.”

It also should be recognized that overpayments are counted in a state’s error rate even when the overpaid benefits are recouped from households. In fiscal year 2002, states collec*ted over $200 million in overissued benefits. New collection techniques, such as intercepting wage earners’ income tax refunds, are expected to increase collections further.

Food stamps now come in the form of an electronic debit card –– like the ATM cards that most Americans carry in their wallets. The food stamp debit cards are used in the supermarket checkout line only to purchase food. This has been a key tool to reduce food stamp fraud.

Retailers or clients who defraud the Food Stamp Program by trading food stamps for money or misrepresenting their circumstances face tough criminal penalties. Sophisticated computer programs monitor food stamp transactions for patterns that may suggest abuse. Federal and state law enforcement agencies are then alerted and investigate.

Food stamp error rates compare favorably to those in other government programs for which data is available. For example, the Internal Revenue Service estimates a noncompliance rate with federal personal income taxes of at least fif*teen percent in 2001. This represents at least $257 billion lost to the federal government.[1]



Savings Could Come Only From Harmful Benefit Cuts

The Congress, the Administration, and states already have enacted and are carry*ing out measures to safeguard the Food Stamp Program from waste, fraud, and abuse. The 2002 Farm Bill, which reauthorized the Food Stamp Program for five years, contained major reforms to the food stamp quality control system. These reforms have contributed to the declines in the error rate in recent years.

No one has proposed additional legislation that would curtail fraud in the Food Stamp Program without causing harm to low-income households. As discussed above, most of the errors result from honest mistakes that states or households make. If there were a magical policy to reduce fraud, Congress would already have enacted it.

Any proposal that would extract large savings from the Food Stamp Program as part of this year’s budget would require cutting eligibility for food stamp benefits or lowering the already modest benefit levels. Such cuts would result in increased struggles for low-income families, the elderly, and people with disabilities to pay their bills and have enough money for the nutritious food they need.



Food Stamps are not Overly Generous

Food stamp benefits are based on the amount that USDA has determined is mini*mally necessary for households to purchase a nutritiously adequate diet. The aver*age food stamp benefit is only about $1 per person per meal.

The Food Stamp Program is efficiently targeted to reach the people that have the most difficulty affording an adequate diet: over 95 percent of food stamp benefits go to households with income below the federal poverty level. About 80 percent of benefits go to families with children. Virtually all of the remainder goes to the elderly and people with disabilities.

The last time the Agriculture Committees faced reconciliation instructions, in 1995 and 1996, the Food Stamp Program was cut by almost $28 billion over six years — almost 20 percent by the sixth year — as part of the 1996 welfare law. A substantial portion of these cuts came from across-the-board benefit reductions that affected nearly all recipient households, including families with children, the working poor, the elderly, and people with disabilities. In addition, eligibility was severely curtailed for legal immigrants and unemployed childless adults. Since 1996, Congress has enacted several pieces of legislation that have undone or moder*ated some of the most severe cuts, but about two-thirds of the cuts remain in effect.

Although the Budget Committees sought to justify the 1995-1996 reconciliation instructions as attacks on waste, fraud, and abuse and toughening work and other behavioral requirements, a total of only three percent of the savings the Agricul*ture Committees found came from anti-fraud provisions, stronger sanctions on people refusing to work, and reduced administrative costs. Some 97 percent of the savings came from eligibility and benefit cuts.

After unemployment insurance, the Food Stamp Program is the federal benefit pro*gram that is most responsive to the economy. Food stamp participation and spending have grown since 2000, primarily because of the economic slowdown that turned into a recession in 2001. But it is important to remember that this growth followed 6 years of declining participation and spending that occurred primarily because of the strong economy of the late 1990s.

The net result is that over the past ten years, food stamp spending has grown at an average annual rate about the same as the rate of inflation. Between 1995 and 2005, food stamp spending grew at an average annual rate of 2.6 percent. Over that same period the rate of food price inflation (as measured by the Consumer Price Index) was 2.6 percent. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) cur*rently forecasts that over the next 10 years, from 2005 to 2015, the average annual growth rate in food stamp costs will be only about 2 percent a year, very close to the projected rate of food price inflation.

The Food Stamp Program has not contributed significantly to the return to deficit spending. Between 2000 and 2005, increases in food stamp spending accounted for less than 1 percent of the swing from surpluses to deficits that occurred over those years.[2]

 

[Shogun]

Not only that, but the fs program is in place to KEEP THE CHILDREN OF THOSE WHO ARE INCAPABLE OF SUPPORTING THEM FROM STARVING. Is this really too hard a concept to figure out, Shoog? They are required to participate in job search programs already. To spend money which should be going directly to the stomachs of the poor on something that is sure to dq and reduce the amount of fs the kids of a poor family depend on is ridiculous. The program exists to feed people who, for WHATEVER REASON, cannot feed themselves adequately.

Most of my clients are working poor. They work. But they have issues. Mental health, drug, alcohol, usually in such a convoluted mass you can't tell where any of it originates. You aren't going to make these people better by starving them and their kids. You'll just kill them off. Which is idiotic. If we have the program for those people, then let those people fucking use it. Or get rid of it altogether.

But it's a good program. It's relatively inexpensive, and it does a world of good. So quit obsessing about it. Concentrate on something that really does need fixing.

I tellya! Nothing says "KEEP KIDS FROM STARVING" quite like a fucking Kobe Beef Steak!

your mellodrama isn't convincing. I know exactly what it's like to be a kid whose family is on foodstamps, bitch. The difference between you and I is that I understand the cost of such a program and am not trying to normalize poverty with a middle class self esteem just because we couldn't afford food that didn't come in a yellow box with black lettering.

Again, the MORE excuses you make for abusers the MORE food you take from the mouths of those who actually need it. You want to know what MY family DIDNT do while on FS? Make excuses to get drunk or buy a fucking sack of pot. or, buy an 8 ball of coke OR shoot up some fucking herion. If you want to enable abusers then so be it. LORD fucking knows you have a personal financial reason to see that the status quo remains. Trying to deflect the cancer of a few rotten apples will only spoil the entire goddamn program. Your opinon about the relative cost means two things. Im sure you know what they are.

You fucking moron. How does providing foodstamps to a family subsidize abuse? I work with child welfare, idiot. And I'm not making excuses for anyone. All I'm saying is if they qualify for foodstamps, assholes like you have no right to tell them WHAT BRAND OF FUCKING FOOD TO BUY. It's none of your business. If you see them beating their kids in the grocery store, feel free to shout at them and call CW. But buying their kids a decorated birthday cake, steak, or fucking mountain dew is NOT ABUSE and is none of your fucking business.

And stop with the noble poor boy shit. My family was poor too, we lived on fucking beans and rice, and my mom worked her ass off, as did all of us kids as soon as we were able to. My family paid enough in taxes to support 10 families on foodstamps from now until the end of fucking time. The fact is, you can't look at someone using an ebt card and buying lobster and just "know" they're abusing the system, asshole.

So quit harassing people in the aisles. You just make the problem worse. And someday you'll come up against the wrong one and she'll drop you where you stand.

By REFUSING to filter out ABUSER OF THE SYSTEM you enable said abuse. It's pretty simple. I mean, CLEARLY not as simply as serving gold flaked ice cream to the poor but.. hey... let's see generic vanilla ice cream from a white label do the same thing!




And, again, it IS my business because YOU don't pay the fucking funding to support the program. When you do then you can go ahead and insist that tax payers don't count. As it is...


and yes, if you can't afford to buy your own fucking mountain dew then I guess you should be drinking WATER, eh? A little motivation, instead of blind compensation, goes a long way. If you can't afford to eat lobster and steak then guess what... Tax payers should not be forced to make sure you have steak night in your goddamn budget.


and yes, BY THE VERY FUCKING DEFINITON OF THE FS PROGRAM, IF YOU ARE BUYING FUCKING LOBSTER WITH FOOD STMPS THEN YOU ARE ABUSING THE FUCKING SYSTEM. Just like if you sell your goddamn FS for beer money or to buy a pack of smokes. I really don't care what kind of resume bullshit you keep wanting to post. Food Stamps should not be used to purchase frivolous fucking food on a goddamn expensive budget. If you can't afford beer then you had better not order the fucking Krystal champaign.

END OF FUCKING STORY. Jesus christ, it's that kind of bullshit that PUTS people on FS in the first goddamn place. Hey, fuckit. I don't want to pay for food this year so I'm moving to Baba's juridiction and Im going to roll up in a goddamn lexus when picking up my food stamps. I mean, who is the TAXPAYER to judge my free food debit card?

 

[Shogun]

Some in Congress have suggested that the Food Stamp Program can be cut this year by targeting “waste, fraud, and abuse.” In fact,

The Food Stamp Program is efficient and effective. Program integrity has improved dramatically in recent years and food stamp error rates are now at an all-time low. USDA data show that over 98 percent of food stamp benefits go to eligible households. The low error rate is a major accomp*lishment for a large benefit program that is administered by thousands of eligi*bil*ity workers in state and local offices across the country.
As the U. S. Government Ac*countability Office (GAO) reported in May 2005, “[t]he pay*ment error rate has fallen each year since 1999 … This decline in the payment error rate has been wide*spread: the rate fell in 42 states and the District of Columbia, and the rates in 18 of these states fell by at least one-third.”
GAO further reported that “[a]lmost two-thirds of the payment errors in the Food Stamp Program are caused by case*workers, usually when they fail to act on new infor*ma*tion or make mistakes when applying program rules.” In addition, the program’s success in serving the working poor contributes in part to its error rate: according to GAO, “managing cases with earnings contributes to payment error in part because case*workers may find it difficult to keep up with frequent changes reported to them.”

Any policies that would significantly reduce food stamp benefit expenditures would have either to eliminate eligibility for various groups of low-income families and individuals or to reduce the already modest benefit amounts. Either approach would cause harm to the low-income households — such as families with children, the elderly, or people with disabilities — who depend upon the Food Stamp Program to help them afford an adequate diet.
The Food Stamp Program’s benefits are already lean. Food stamp benefits average only about $1 per person per meal.

Figure 1






The Food Stamp Error Rate has Reached All-time Lows

Almost ninety-nine percent of food stamp benefits are issued to eligible persons, the vast bulk of whom are children and parents in low-income families, senior citizens, and people with disabilities.

On June 24, the U.S. De*partment of Agricul*ture (USDA) announced that the national combined payment error rate in 2004 reached is sixth consecutive all-time low at just 5.88 percent. Until recently 6 percent was the threshold the Food Stamp Act established for exemplary perfor*mance. An error rate below 6 percent qualified a state for a bonus payment or enhanced funding. Now, because of improved payment accuracy, the national average has exceeded this exemplary level.

Some portray the food stamp “com*bined” error rate as a reflection of the dimen*sion of excessive federal expendi*tures due to er*rors. This is incorrect since the combined error rate in*cludes underpayments that save the Pro*gram money. The USDA issues three separate payment error rates: the overpayment error rate, the underpayment error rate, and the combined payment error rate. The overpayment error rate counts benefits issued to ineligible households as well as benefits issued to eli*gible households in excess of what federal rules provide*. The underpayment error rate measures errors in which eligible, par*ti**cipating households received fewer benefits than the Program’s rules direct. The combined payment error rate is the result of summing (rather than net*ting) the overpayment and underpayment error rates. As GAO notes, “nderpayments represent unintentional financial savings to the federal government.”

In other words, to calculate the combined payment error rate USDA adds together the overpayment error rate, which in 2004 was 4.48 percent nationally, and the underpayment *error rate, which in 2004 was 1.41 percent, to reach a combined error rate of 5.88 percent. The net loss to the federal government, how*ever, from the errors in that state’s program (i.e., the bene*fits lost through over*payments minus those saved by underpayments) would be only three percent.

Finally, since 98 percent of benefits go to eligible households, about half of over*payments result from eligible low-income households getting benefits that are modestly in error, rather than from ineligible households participating.

Relatively few of these errors represent dishonesty or fraud on the part of recipe*ents (for example, recipients lying to eligibility workers to get more food stamps). The overwhelming majority of food stamp errors result from honest mistakes by recipients, eligibil*ity wor*kers, data entry clerks, or com*puter program*mers. In recent years, states have reported that about half of the dollar value of overpay*ments and three-quarters of the dollar value of underpayments were their fault, rather than recipients’ fault. Much of the rest of overpayments resulted from innocent errors by households facing a program with complex rules.

GAO reports that USDA and the states “have taken many approaches to increase*ing food stamp payment accuracy, … includ[ing] practices to improve accounta*bil*ity, perform risk as*sess*ments, implement changes based on such assessments, and monitor program performance.” It found that these practices were “recog*nized as being effective in reducing payment errors.”

It also should be recognized that overpayments are counted in a state’s error rate even when the overpaid benefits are recouped from households. In fiscal year 2002, states collec*ted over $200 million in overissued benefits. New collection techniques, such as intercepting wage earners’ income tax refunds, are expected to increase collections further.

Food stamps now come in the form of an electronic debit card –– like the ATM cards that most Americans carry in their wallets. The food stamp debit cards are used in the supermarket checkout line only to purchase food. This has been a key tool to reduce food stamp fraud.

Retailers or clients who defraud the Food Stamp Program by trading food stamps for money or misrepresenting their circumstances face tough criminal penalties. Sophisticated computer programs monitor food stamp transactions for patterns that may suggest abuse. Federal and state law enforcement agencies are then alerted and investigate.

Food stamp error rates compare favorably to those in other government programs for which data is available. For example, the Internal Revenue Service estimates a noncompliance rate with federal personal income taxes of at least fif*teen percent in 2001. This represents at least $257 billion lost to the federal government.[1]



Savings Could Come Only From Harmful Benefit Cuts

The Congress, the Administration, and states already have enacted and are carry*ing out measures to safeguard the Food Stamp Program from waste, fraud, and abuse. The 2002 Farm Bill, which reauthorized the Food Stamp Program for five years, contained major reforms to the food stamp quality control system. These reforms have contributed to the declines in the error rate in recent years.

No one has proposed additional legislation that would curtail fraud in the Food Stamp Program without causing harm to low-income households. As discussed above, most of the errors result from honest mistakes that states or households make. If there were a magical policy to reduce fraud, Congress would already have enacted it.

Any proposal that would extract large savings from the Food Stamp Program as part of this year’s budget would require cutting eligibility for food stamp benefits or lowering the already modest benefit levels. Such cuts would result in increased struggles for low-income families, the elderly, and people with disabilities to pay their bills and have enough money for the nutritious food they need.



Food Stamps are not Overly Generous

Food stamp benefits are based on the amount that USDA has determined is mini*mally necessary for households to purchase a nutritiously adequate diet. The aver*age food stamp benefit is only about $1 per person per meal.

The Food Stamp Program is efficiently targeted to reach the people that have the most difficulty affording an adequate diet: over 95 percent of food stamp benefits go to households with income below the federal poverty level. About 80 percent of benefits go to families with children. Virtually all of the remainder goes to the elderly and people with disabilities.

The last time the Agriculture Committees faced reconciliation instructions, in 1995 and 1996, the Food Stamp Program was cut by almost $28 billion over six years — almost 20 percent by the sixth year — as part of the 1996 welfare law. A substantial portion of these cuts came from across-the-board benefit reductions that affected nearly all recipient households, including families with children, the working poor, the elderly, and people with disabilities. In addition, eligibility was severely curtailed for legal immigrants and unemployed childless adults. Since 1996, Congress has enacted several pieces of legislation that have undone or moder*ated some of the most severe cuts, but about two-thirds of the cuts remain in effect.

Although the Budget Committees sought to justify the 1995-1996 reconciliation instructions as attacks on waste, fraud, and abuse and toughening work and other behavioral requirements, a total of only three percent of the savings the Agricul*ture Committees found came from anti-fraud provisions, stronger sanctions on people refusing to work, and reduced administrative costs. Some 97 percent of the savings came from eligibility and benefit cuts.

After unemployment insurance, the Food Stamp Program is the federal benefit pro*gram that is most responsive to the economy. Food stamp participation and spending have grown since 2000, primarily because of the economic slowdown that turned into a recession in 2001. But it is important to remember that this growth followed 6 years of declining participation and spending that occurred primarily because of the strong economy of the late 1990s.

The net result is that over the past ten years, food stamp spending has grown at an average annual rate about the same as the rate of inflation. Between 1995 and 2005, food stamp spending grew at an average annual rate of 2.6 percent. Over that same period the rate of food price inflation (as measured by the Consumer Price Index) was 2.6 percent. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) cur*rently forecasts that over the next 10 years, from 2005 to 2015, the average annual growth rate in food stamp costs will be only about 2 percent a year, very close to the projected rate of food price inflation.

The Food Stamp Program has not contributed significantly to the return to deficit spending. Between 2000 and 2005, increases in food stamp spending accounted for less than 1 percent of the swing from surpluses to deficits that occurred over those years.[2]

hey dude.. this is like the third time I've asked you to provide a link with your source. This is in direct violation of forum rules regarding posting material here. If you can't figure out how to post a link you'd better ask someone.

 

[Peejay]

hey dude.. this is like the third time I've asked you to provide a link with your source. This is in direct violation of forum rules regarding posting material here. If you can't figure out how to post a link you'd better ask someone.

Sorry dude. I was high on food stamp drugs. Maybe USMB can afford to start drug testing users.

The Food Stamp Program Is Effective and Efficient, 3/10/05

 

[Shogun]

hey dude.. this is like the third time I've asked you to provide a link with your source. This is in direct violation of forum rules regarding posting material here. If you can't figure out how to post a link you'd better ask someone.

Sorry dude. I was high on food stamp drugs. Maybe USMB can afford to start drug testing users.

The Food Stamp Program Is Effective and Efficient, 3/10/05

looks like your 2005 source needs some updating.

Food stamp abuse on the rise
Wednesday, March 11, 2009

"The food stamp program has very strict regulations and the participants are made aware of these restrictions. It is against the law to buy, sell, or trade food stamps — they are to be used exclusively for the purchase of food. Those who abuse the program are committing fraud and will be prosecuted," Butler County Prosecutor Robin Piper said in a news release.

Misuse of food stamps is on the rise in the current tough financial climate, said Roger Clark, food stamp fraud investigator for Butler County Job and Family Services.

"I get anonymous calls several times a day," Clark said. "We are finding it more and more."

So far this year $55,000 has been collected for food stamp clients who either did not disclose employment or fraudulently used food stamps, Clark said.

Food stamp abuse on the rise


8 men accused of food-stamp abuse

Eight men who ran four area food markets are accused of abusing federal food programs for the needy at a cost to taxpayers of more than $1.5 million, according to newly unsealed charges.

Federal officials announced the indictments and arrests yesterday, though six of the eight men were indicted on Jan. 10 and arrested Friday.

The indictments say that the owners and managers of two stores on the North Side and two on the West Side allowed their customers to use food stamps and WIC vouchers illegally. They permitted the exchange of the vouchers and stamps for cash and allowed people to use it to buy prepaid international phone cards and to pay off personal loans, authorities said.

The Columbus Dispatch : 8 men accused of food-stamp abuse




If you two dumb bastards can't fathom why the integrity of the FS program depends on filtering out those who abuse then then so be it. Lord fucking knows the expert WOULD be a busker and someone who gets paid by the status quo.

 

[Peejay]

hey dude.. this is like the third time I've asked you to provide a link with your source. This is in direct violation of forum rules regarding posting material here. If you can't figure out how to post a link you'd better ask someone.

Sorry dude. I was high on food stamp drugs. Maybe USMB can afford to start drug testing users.

The Food Stamp Program Is Effective and Efficient, 3/10/05

looks like your 2005 source needs some updating.

Food stamp abuse on the rise
Wednesday, March 11, 2009

"The food stamp program has very strict regulations and the participants are made aware of these restrictions. It is against the law to buy, sell, or trade food stamps — they are to be used exclusively for the purchase of food. Those who abuse the program are committing fraud and will be prosecuted," Butler County Prosecutor Robin Piper said in a news release.

Misuse of food stamps is on the rise in the current tough financial climate, said Roger Clark, food stamp fraud investigator for Butler County Job and Family Services.

"I get anonymous calls several times a day," Clark said. "We are finding it more and more."

So far this year $55,000 has been collected for food stamp clients who either did not disclose employment or fraudulently used food stamps, Clark said.

Food stamp abuse on the rise


8 men accused of food-stamp abuse

Eight men who ran four area food markets are accused of abusing federal food programs for the needy at a cost to taxpayers of more than $1.5 million, according to newly unsealed charges.

Federal officials announced the indictments and arrests yesterday, though six of the eight men were indicted on Jan. 10 and arrested Friday.

The indictments say that the owners and managers of two stores on the North Side and two on the West Side allowed their customers to use food stamps and WIC vouchers illegally. They permitted the exchange of the vouchers and stamps for cash and allowed people to use it to buy prepaid international phone cards and to pay off personal loans, authorities said.

The Columbus Dispatch : 8 men accused of food-stamp abuse




If you two dumb bastards can't fathom why the integrity of the FS program depends on filtering out those who abuse then then so be it. Lord fucking knows the expert WOULD be a busker and someone who gets paid by the status quo.

Hey genius, these people have been caught and punished. Looks like good work to me. carry on.

 

[Peejay]

Efforts to reduce the illegal use of food stamps have kept millions of dollars in benefits from going to waste during the past five years, but small convenience and grocery stores in low-income areas continue to be hotbeds for fraud, according to the Government Accountability Office.
The GAO is recommending that the Department of Agriculture intensify its focus on finding stores that violate federal rules and increase penalties for trafficking in misused stamps. The GAO's recommendations, in a report released in October, come as Congress is preparing to revisit the $29 billion-a-year food stamp program next year as part of a giant farm bill.

Among other things, the GAO is urging the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) — the agency within the Agriculture Department that runs the food stamp program — to review the 160,000 stores authorized to receive stamps to determine which are most likely to engage in fraud and to target them for enforcement.

Small grocery stores hotbeds for food stamp fraud - USATODAY.com


Sounds to me like the highest density of fraud is going on with dishonest business men . Imagine that.

Do you think that maybe these efforts, like the ones alluded to in your previous post, might be more worth while than going after recipients one at a time with questionable drug testing ?

 

[Shogun]

Sorry dude. I was high on food stamp drugs. Maybe USMB can afford to start drug testing users.

The Food Stamp Program Is Effective and Efficient, 3/10/05

looks like your 2005 source needs some updating.

Food stamp abuse on the rise
Wednesday, March 11, 2009

"The food stamp program has very strict regulations and the participants are made aware of these restrictions. It is against the law to buy, sell, or trade food stamps — they are to be used exclusively for the purchase of food. Those who abuse the program are committing fraud and will be prosecuted," Butler County Prosecutor Robin Piper said in a news release.

Misuse of food stamps is on the rise in the current tough financial climate, said Roger Clark, food stamp fraud investigator for Butler County Job and Family Services.

"I get anonymous calls several times a day," Clark said. "We are finding it more and more."

So far this year $55,000 has been collected for food stamp clients who either did not disclose employment or fraudulently used food stamps, Clark said.

Food stamp abuse on the rise


8 men accused of food-stamp abuse

Eight men who ran four area food markets are accused of abusing federal food programs for the needy at a cost to taxpayers of more than $1.5 million, according to newly unsealed charges.

Federal officials announced the indictments and arrests yesterday, though six of the eight men were indicted on Jan. 10 and arrested Friday.

The indictments say that the owners and managers of two stores on the North Side and two on the West Side allowed their customers to use food stamps and WIC vouchers illegally. They permitted the exchange of the vouchers and stamps for cash and allowed people to use it to buy prepaid international phone cards and to pay off personal loans, authorities said.

The Columbus Dispatch : 8 men accused of food-stamp abuse




If you two dumb bastards can't fathom why the integrity of the FS program depends on filtering out those who abuse then then so be it. Lord fucking knows the expert WOULD be a busker and someone who gets paid by the status quo.

Hey genius, these people have been caught and punished. Looks like good work to me. carry on.

sure.. individuals that YOU, apparently, wouldn't waste money filtering out because it might cost money.

 

[Shogun]

Efforts to reduce the illegal use of food stamps have kept millions of dollars in benefits from going to waste during the past five years, but small convenience and grocery stores in low-income areas continue to be hotbeds for fraud, according to the Government Accountability Office.
The GAO is recommending that the Department of Agriculture intensify its focus on finding stores that violate federal rules and increase penalties for trafficking in misused stamps. The GAO's recommendations, in a report released in October, come as Congress is preparing to revisit the $29 billion-a-year food stamp program next year as part of a giant farm bill.

Among other things, the GAO is urging the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) — the agency within the Agriculture Department that runs the food stamp program — to review the 160,000 stores authorized to receive stamps to determine which are most likely to engage in fraud and to target them for enforcement.

Small grocery stores hotbeds for food stamp fraud - USATODAY.com


Sounds to me like the highest density of fraud is going on with dishonest business men . Imagine that.

Do you think that maybe these efforts, like the ones alluded to in your previous post, might be more worth while than going after recipients one at a time with questionable drug testing ?

I suggest you reread my thread input thus far. My first post specifically states that I'd remove all food stamp programs from chain stores and make them redeamable only at local food banks where generic products could be stocked and controlled.

once again, three steps ahead, dude.

 

[Peejay]

looks like your 2005 source needs some updating.

Food stamp abuse on the rise
Wednesday, March 11, 2009

"The food stamp program has very strict regulations and the participants are made aware of these restrictions. It is against the law to buy, sell, or trade food stamps — they are to be used exclusively for the purchase of food. Those who abuse the program are committing fraud and will be prosecuted," Butler County Prosecutor Robin Piper said in a news release.

Misuse of food stamps is on the rise in the current tough financial climate, said Roger Clark, food stamp fraud investigator for Butler County Job and Family Services.

"I get anonymous calls several times a day," Clark said. "We are finding it more and more."

So far this year $55,000 has been collected for food stamp clients who either did not disclose employment or fraudulently used food stamps, Clark said.

Food stamp abuse on the rise


8 men accused of food-stamp abuse

Eight men who ran four area food markets are accused of abusing federal food programs for the needy at a cost to taxpayers of more than $1.5 million, according to newly unsealed charges.

Federal officials announced the indictments and arrests yesterday, though six of the eight men were indicted on Jan. 10 and arrested Friday.

The indictments say that the owners and managers of two stores on the North Side and two on the West Side allowed their customers to use food stamps and WIC vouchers illegally. They permitted the exchange of the vouchers and stamps for cash and allowed people to use it to buy prepaid international phone cards and to pay off personal loans, authorities said.

The Columbus Dispatch : 8 men accused of food-stamp abuse




If you two dumb bastards can't fathom why the integrity of the FS program depends on filtering out those who abuse then then so be it. Lord fucking knows the expert WOULD be a busker and someone who gets paid by the status quo.

Hey genius, these people have been caught and punished. Looks like good work to me. carry on.

sure.. individuals that YOU, apparently, wouldn't waste money filtering out because it might cost money.

So, you are claiming that these people were caught via drug testing ? Or are you changing the premise here, mid stream ?

I must have missed the part about drug testing, eh ?

 

[Peejay]

I haven't addressed anything here but the silly and assinine idea of drug testing food stamp applicants.

But if you want, we'll consider if the people in your food bank stores will be anymore honest about handling food stamps than Joe Blow's Market.

Let me tell you a little secret: People cheat. Don't tell now.

 

[raceright]

There is testing equipment available from several manufactures (one being the alcomate from advanced safety devices ) gives immediate results testing for Alcohol,Pot,coke and several other substances, cost $139.95. 100 disposable mouth pieces are $39.95.
end cost is about .33 per test. It has bright led lights and also beeps if over limits..We all love computers ...wonder how ya gonna feel about this one. Already in use at some sporting events and several
employers are going to use them also to as the saying go's thin out the heard..(ya will not get unemployment compensation if fired for substance abuse in several states)

I can only imagine the legal nightmare this would be for a government application like food stamps. False positives, cough medicine poisitives, equipment failure. Some rejected applicant will sue for $50 million and take every penny saved and then some.

Sorry, this whole idea of drug testing, as you demonstrate so well here, has bred an entire industry around a concept that has proven to be worth so many popcorn farts. Meanwhile testing centers , equipment and administrators have raked in more in testing profits than anyone has saved in drug related losses. Spending dollars to save dimes.

Scared ya huh Hi Tech future will be used to thin out the heard. If ya use drugs or over drink watch out reguardless of law suites its coming