• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Senate Democrat blasts 'Obamaphone' over fraudulent findings, lack of oversight

danarhea said:
No, the expansion to cell phones was in 2008. Obama was not in office then. Bush was.
Click to expand...

Yeah, if IIRC it's a program between the FCC, The Telecommunication companies and Congress.

The program was started under Reagan because with AT&T being broke up Congress knew the price to have a home phone was going to sky rocket. And it did. Then the program was expanded under Clinton, and expanded again to include Cell Phones under Bush 2.

The POTUS doesn't even have a say in the program.

But the Con Media and the Republicans knew attaching Obama's name to the program would win them points with their uninformed base. And it worked, and still does even though that whole Obamaphone lie has been debunked many times. Some people refuse to learn.
 
ludin said:
Senate Democrat blasts 'Obamaphone' over fraudulent findings, complete lack of oversight' | Fox News

The GAO report found that about 10.6 million people have an Obamaphone, but 36 percent of them may not qualify, according to the Washington Times. The audit also concluded that more than 5,500 people were found to be enrolled for two phones, while the program was paying for about 6,400 phones for persons the government has listed as dead, the paper reported.

complete lack of oversight has cost taxpayers billions of dollars.
Click to expand...

There are certain segments within our society who know how to milk & play the system for benefits that they would normally not be eligible for.

I have been around many ass hats that have bragged about it openly over the years......some friends even.

Many of them are retired military associates of mine who are receiving any wheres from 5-40 percent disability, and in better physical shape than I am. They tell me that I am a fool not go go to the VA and make my own claim? :roll: Sorry..........I'm not wired that way.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
Yeah, if IIRC it's a program between the FCC, The Telecommunication companies and Congress.

The program was started under Reagan because with AT&T being broke up Congress knew the price to have a home phone was going to sky rocket. And it did. Then the program was expanded under Clinton, and expanded again to include Cell Phones under Bush 2.

The POTUS doesn't even have a say in the program.

But the Con Media and the Republicans knew attaching Obama's name to the program would win them points with their uninformed base. And it worked, and still does even though that whole Obamaphone lie has been debunked many times. Some people refuse to learn.
Click to expand...

Cons are also under the assumption that only Libs make use of the phones.
Hey, I am all against fraud. So lets sort it out. Spend some time to check who is truly deserving and who is not. Look at actual household income and go from there. Shouldn't be too complicated.
Just lets not scrap the entire program because of a few bad apples.
I just read through one of the "the evil guns did it" threads. So lets compare.
If we do away with the ReaganClintonBushObamaphone because the program is so easily abused, we should take away our gun rights because a few who shouldn't have guns shoot and kill.
I am sure we can come up with some solutions that work. Right?
 
Mr Person said:
It really does amaze me how so many people don't seem to know when the program started but make so much noise about it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Anything more would require the same people to read beyond the headline of a story from Fox News. Such as this paragraph:

"The program -- officially known as the Lifeline Program and run by the Federal Communications Division-- predates President Obama but received attention during his time in office when recipients began to associate the free phone with other benefits given to the poor, the paper reported."
 
Last edited:
Lovebug said:
Cons are also under the assumption that only Libs make use of the phones.
Hey, I am all against fraud. So lets sort it out. Spend some time to check who is truly deserving and who is not. Look at actual household income and go from there. Shouldn't be too complicated.
Just lets not scrap the entire program because of a few bad apples.
I just read through one of the "the evil guns did it" threads. So lets compare.
If we do away with the ReaganClintonBushObamaphone because the program is so easily abused, we should take away our gun rights because a few who shouldn't have guns shoot and kill.
I am sure we can come up with some solutions that work. Right?
Click to expand...
Gun rights are explicitly listed in the constitution. If you have a problem with the constitution you're more than welcome to leave the country. Nowhere in the constitution is it explicitly listed that someone is entitled to a free cell phone.
 
I am pretty sure there is another thread about this tragic waste of taxpayer money.
 
akyron said:
I am pretty sure there is another thread about this tragic waste of taxpayer money.
Click to expand...

Unlikely since taxpayers don't fund the program.

Could be another thread repeats the lie that this program is funded with taxpayer money, but it would be as bogus as this one.
 
JasperL said:
Unlikely since taxpayers don't fund the program.

Could be another thread repeats the lie that this program is funded with taxpayer money, but it would be as bogus as this one.
Click to expand...

so you are calling the congress people that are over this that have said it is a waste of taxpayer money lying?
what information do you derive this from?

if you notice it is democrats that are upset.
 
Lovebug said:
Cons are also under the assumption that only Libs make use of the phones.
Hey, I am all against fraud. So lets sort it out. Spend some time to check who is truly deserving and who is not. Look at actual household income and go from there. Shouldn't be too complicated.
Just lets not scrap the entire program because of a few bad apples.
I just read through one of the "the evil guns did it" threads. So lets compare.
If we do away with the ReaganClintonBushObamaphone because the program is so easily abused, we should take away our gun rights because a few who shouldn't have guns shoot and kill.
I am sure we can come up with some solutions that work. Right?
Click to expand...

why do you continue to lie about stuff in this thread.
from my understanding no one has said scrap the program.

and now the red herring argument. this thread has nothing to do with guns.
 
ludin said:
so you are calling the congress people that are over this that have said it is a waste of taxpayer money lying?
what information do you derive this from?

if you notice it is democrats that are upset.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to repost the several links on this thread that point out this is NOT funded with taxes. The money comes from assessments to carriers, who obviously pass on the cost to users. If you don't believe me, review the thread or use Google to find your answer in a minute or less.

And I'm not defending the abuse - early on I pointed out that the reason no one has an incentive to really care is,

1) It's not funded by taxes, so for Congress, savings in this program cannot be used for any other program, or to cut taxes, or reduce the deficit.

2) The carriers also often sell phones, and the people who sell phones have no financial incentive to make sure the subsidies go to only eligible people. If they deny a person's application, they likely miss out on a sale that will be reimbursed by the program. If sellers approve an application not caring if the person is eligible, they make more money, and face no penalties.
 
JasperL said:
I'm not going to repost the several links on this thread that point out this is NOT funded with taxes. The money comes from assessments to carriers, who obviously pass on the cost to users. If you don't believe me, review the thread or use Google to find your answer in a minute or less.
Click to expand...

OK then it is paid for by taxes which is in turn paid for by tax payers.

And I'm not defending the abuse - early on I pointed out that the reason no one has an incentive to really care is,
1) It's not funded by taxes, so for Congress, savings in this program cannot be used for any other program, or to cut taxes, or reduce the deficit.
Click to expand...

It is funded by taxes you just said it. It is a fee that taxpayers are charged on their phone bill that goes straight to the government so it is a tax.
Obama lost this same fight with the obamacare penalty.

2) The carriers also often sell phones, and the people who sell phones have no financial incentive to make sure the subsidies go to only eligible people. If they deny a person's application, they likely miss out on a sale that will be reimbursed by the program. If sellers approve an application not caring if the person is eligible, they make more money, and face no penalties.
Click to expand...

thank you for making the argument as to why the program is screwed up.
 
ludin said:
OK then it is paid for by taxes which is in turn paid for by tax payers.
Click to expand...

Call it what you want - it is a user fee assessed on phone carriers. If you want to argue the effects are similar to a tax, OK, whatever, but it's being paid 100% by Verizon, ATT, etc.
 
JasperL said:
Call it what you want - it is a user fee assessed on phone carriers. If you want to argue the effects are similar to a tax, OK, whatever, but it's being paid 100% by Verizon, ATT, etc.
Click to expand...

that is a tax if the government is issuing it or collecting it.
no it isn't Verizon customers/att customers are paying it.
 
ludin said:
why do you continue to lie about stuff in this thread.
from my understanding no one has said scrap the program.

and now the red herring argument. this thread has nothing to do with guns.
Click to expand...

Why is my opinion a lie? I really think that it will come to scrapping the program and starting from scratch, which will leave a lot of people stranded.
 
Lovebug said:
Why is my opinion a lie? I really think that it will come to scrapping the program and starting from scratch, which will leave a lot of people stranded.
Click to expand...

so you are just making stuff up. please show where anyone said anything about scrapping the program?
 
reinoe said:
Gun rights are explicitly listed in the constitution. If you have a problem with the constitution you're more than welcome to leave the country.
Click to expand...
Or, you know, campaign for an amendment. That's allowed too.
 
So sad that the only debate here is whether or not it should be called an Obamaphone.

We have a high ranking Democrat here talking about waste. It could be a moment for bipartisanship. But no, it's just an opportunity to bash Obama, who isn't even the president anymore.

It could be an opportunity to encourage action in Congress. You know, the government body with a ridiculously low approval rating. But no, let's spend our time blaming liberals even though they seem just as outraged as anyone.
 
I have always thought of "OBAMAPHONES", as "BRIBES"!

OBAMA should have never been allowed to handout Free Phones to anyone! Congress controls the Purse Strings; so by that standard some Member of Congress seem to have been ASLEEP AT DA WHEEL, to have ever allowed that to happen!

I think that we should Pull Da Plug on all the OBAMAPHONES! Obama has left the Whitehouse, so all of his Tax Payer funded entitlements should be shut down! No one at a time, but rather all at once!

fatuous1
 
Re: Senate Democrat blasts 'Obamaphone' over fraudulent findings, lack of oversite



Well, I guess we'll just have to go take the needed funds from Obama's Stash!

Seriously...

Let's just seize the funds of the Obama Library to pay for the fraud!


To paraphrase the Obama-Phone Lady in the Video:


"Obama... He SUCKS!"

-
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom