Good News: No more handouts for the dead

[chanel]

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama on Thursday signed legislation intended to slash by $50 billion the taxpayer money improperly paid to dead people, fugitives and those in jail who shouldn't be getting benefits.

But that goal, if achieved, would not even halve the $110 billion made in such payments last year.

The new law will strengthen the efforts by federal agencies to halt the flow of improper money in a series of ways. Among those steps: requiring more audits of programs and adding penalties for agencies that don't comply with the law. The legislation also broadens how any recovered money can be used.

Obama chose to sign the bill in front of cameras in the White House's State Dining Room in hopes of bringing attention to the new law.

Less money for dead people: Obama signs waste law - Yahoo! News

I am truly shocked. Aren't the dead an important voting bloc for the Dems?

Also - anyone notice any group missing from the "improper payments" category?

 

[VaYank5150]

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama on Thursday signed legislation intended to slash by $50 billion the taxpayer money improperly paid to dead people, fugitives and those in jail who shouldn't be getting benefits.

But that goal, if achieved, would not even halve the $110 billion made in such payments last year.

The new law will strengthen the efforts by federal agencies to halt the flow of improper money in a series of ways. Among those steps: requiring more audits of programs and adding penalties for agencies that don't comply with the law. The legislation also broadens how any recovered money can be used.

Obama chose to sign the bill in front of cameras in the White House's State Dining Room in hopes of bringing attention to the new law.

Less money for dead people: Obama signs waste law - Yahoo! News

I am truly shocked. Aren't the dead an important voting bloc for the Dems?

Also - anyone notice any group missing from the "improper payments" category?

Any President supporting the elimination of wasteful government spending is OK in my book. I wonder why previous Presidents haven't taken this on?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama on Thursday signed legislation intended to slash by $50 billion the taxpayer money improperly paid to dead people, fugitives and those in jail who shouldn't be getting benefits.

But that goal, if achieved, would not even halve the $110 billion made in such payments last year.

The new law will strengthen the efforts by federal agencies to halt the flow of improper money in a series of ways. Among those steps: requiring more audits of programs and adding penalties for agencies that don't comply with the law. The legislation also broadens how any recovered money can be used.

Obama chose to sign the bill in front of cameras in the White House's State Dining Room in hopes of bringing attention to the new law.

Less money for dead people: Obama signs waste law - Yahoo! News

I am truly shocked. Aren't the dead an important voting bloc for the Dems?

Also - anyone notice any group missing from the "improper payments" category?

Any President supporting the elimination of wasteful government spending is OK in my book. I wonder why previous Presidents haven't taken this on?

Bingo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[VaYank5150]

Where'd chanel go? I was hoping to ask her/him why they were against cutting government waste?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Where'd chanel go? I was hoping to ask her/him why they were against cutting government waste?

No doubt tuning-in to Porky Limbaugh, for today's thinking-"orders".

****

Maybe the 'Baggers are havin' a BU$HCO Bonu$-Buck$ Party, somewhere.

​

 

[chanel]

Oh I'm all in favor of cutting government waste. The irony here is that $110 billion was paid fraudulently, but this new bill will catch less than half. What's an acceptable percentage to you?

Aren't there audit controls within the bureaucracy now? Could it be possible that people are not doing their job? Or is the entire system so corrupt and wasteful that we need auditors to audit the auditors?

No mention of the missing subgroup. Anyone?

 

[chanel]

I haven't listened to Limbaugh since the 90's. I get all the good stuff here.

 

[VaYank5150]

Oh I'm all in favor of cutting government waste. The irony here is that $110 billion was paid fraudulently, but this new bill will catch less than half. What's an acceptable percentage to you?

Aren't there audit controls within the bureaucracy now? Could it be possible that people are not doing their job? Or is the entire system so corrupt and wasteful that we need auditors to audit the auditors?

No mention of the missing subgroup. Anyone?

Even if we only catch 1%....that is still 1% more then we were catching previously.

 

[chanel]

Only if the 1% equals more than the cost of the dept.

 

[VaYank5150]

Only if the 1% equals more than the cost of the dept.

Fair enough. So, you support this new legislation?

 

[chanel]

I support the goal but I think its grandstanding. Why a new law to enforce one already in existence?

And why no mention of that "sub group"? Could that account for the other 55 percent? Or was that just a number picked out of the air? Kinda like the 500 billion they are still looking for in Medicaid fraud?

 

[VaYank5150]

I support the goal but I think its grandstanding. Why a new law to enforce one already in existence?

And why no mention of that "sub group"? Could that account for the other 55 percent? Or was that just a number picked out of the air? Kinda like the 500 billion they are still looking for in Medicaid fraud?

I completely support the goal as well. I wonder why Bush and his "conservative" Congress never attempted anything like this?

 

[The Rabbi]

I support the goal but I think its grandstanding. Why a new law to enforce one already in existence?

And why no mention of that "sub group"? Could that account for the other 55 percent? Or was that just a number picked out of the air? Kinda like the 500 billion they are still looking for in Medicaid fraud?

I completely support the goal as well. I wonder why Bush and his "conservative" Congress never attempted anything like this?

Never attempted to pass grandstanding legislation that doesn't alter laws already on the books?
Is that what you mean?

 

[VaYank5150]

I support the goal but I think its grandstanding. Why a new law to enforce one already in existence?

And why no mention of that "sub group"? Could that account for the other 55 percent? Or was that just a number picked out of the air? Kinda like the 500 billion they are still looking for in Medicaid fraud?

I completely support the goal as well. I wonder why Bush and his "conservative" Congress never attempted anything like this?

Never attempted to pass grandstanding legislation that doesn't alter laws already on the books?
Is that what you mean?

No, dumbass, attempt to pass legislation that will cut out wasteful spending in the Federal government. Hell, Bush never even TRIED.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Oh I'm all in favor of cutting government waste. The irony here is that $110 billion was paid fraudulently, but this new bill will catch less than half. What's an acceptable percentage to you?

Aren't there audit controls within the bureaucracy now?

Gee......you mean...like....some kind o' REGULATION??????? ​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

The 'Baggers/Dead-O-Heads are SCREWED, NOW!!!!

​

National Learning Standards Make The Grade​

"Setting national standards for U.S. students has been tried in the past without success -- but a new state-led effort is gaining momentum, according to an official of an educational think tank that compiled a nationwide study comparing standards.

The new benchmarks -- called Common Core Standards -- are a move initiated at the state level to come up with a set of standards that will be used by all states to create cross-border consistency in what students will be expected to know."

Welllllllllllllllllllllll......there'll be no-more hidin'-out (in Red States), for illiterates, NOW!!!!!

​

 

[SFC Ollie]

First off it's not about Bush, or Clinton, or Bush, or Reagan, Or any other President.

It's about Democrats growing the Federal Government, I wonder how many Federal jobs this Bill just created to do a job that should have already been being done?

And the Group that is missing from the bill is the illegals, er, should we say future voting Democrats?

 

[VaYank5150]

First off it's not about Bush, or Clinton, or Bush, or Reagan, Or any other President.

It's about Democrats growing the Federal Government, I wonder how many Federal jobs this Bill just created to do a job that should have already been being done?

And the Group that is missing from the bill is the illegals, er, should we say future voting Democrats?

So, as a conservative, you would prefer we simply sit back, allow the waste to continue and NOT attempt to fix it. Got it.

 

[chanel]

Yes I believe there are plenty of regulations and I believe in enforcement of those regs. What I don't agree with is creating more regulations and hiring more regulators the regulate the regulators and more auditors to audit the auditors. Its expansion of government again. Why can't the people in those depts just do their damn jobs? There are millions of unemployed people out there who would be happy to replace them if they feel overworked.

 

[xotoxi]

Also - anyone notice any group missing from the "improper payments" category?

Niggas?