Old friend Tim Imholt talks about fraud in the EBT system at PJ media
Sources say the incidence of fraud is as high as one in four beneficiaries. Unbelievable — but all too possible.
This means $23 billion per year — nearly $2 billion a month— is going into the hands of criminals and scam artists.
That’s almost twice the cost of the one-time federal bailout of Chrysler Corp., which Obama touts as rescuing the economy from collapse.
He pooh poohs the idea of photo ID systems because. In a land of self checkout counters those could be easily defeated, but he has a more effective solution.
Today’s technology can put fingerprint scanners on something the size of a credit card; the chips and memory needed to operate the device easily could fit where the hologram is on most of your credit cards. Credit and debit-card swipe machines already can handle this, so there would be no cost to the store or extra hassle to the user to put this system into place.
This plan, if enacted, would solve a number of issues.
First, the system could be set up so no one gets two cards. If two cards have the same fingerprint, one — or both— could be deactivated.
Second, no one could sell his or her card for cash to buy drugs or alcohol. Only the person to whom it was issued could use the card. (In the case of shut-ins, the card holders could designate an authorized user to buy groceries on their behalf.)
Third, no one could use the identity of a dead person to defraud the system for years without challenge.
This would effectively solve the problem on a permanent basis he closes thus:
The only people who will be hurt are scammers, drug dealers, and other criminals who prey on the poor.
We can virtually eliminate EBT fraud without stigmatizing or investigating anyone — and without a million-dollar advertising campaign. We can do this with existing fingerprint software by using something everyone has: a thumb. Any politician who does not support this should have to explain why.
This makes a lot of sense, every time people see fraud in the system support for social spending drops among the public. An actual liberal who is interested in helping the poor and needy would be very interested in such a solution as it would restore confidence and support to those programs among the public.
A pol interested in buying votes with them would not.