Kev3188
Veteran
See below...
What a Shame !
- Thread starter NewHampshire Black Bears
- Start date
La Li Lu Le Lo
Veteran
- May 29, 2010
- 7,388
- 2,648
The list is long.777 fixer said:
I suppose you think it is totally fine to pay a farmer subsidies not to grow food right?
How about farmers collecting insurance for crops they never even planted?
How about the fact we ship tons of food oversea's (courtesy of the taxpayer) but feed our own school children low quality food.
I would not feed that crap they serve in schools to a dog, not even a Dog Wonder.
I still have not seen an answer to my question, are you OK with Democrats using taxpayer money to buy votes? Because that is exactly what they are doing.
Dog Wonder
Veteran
Everyone but him.
700UW said:
Vegetables were high back then in the days before global trade if you recollect. Old boy was just trying to save a buck....besides, kids are throwing them away still to this day. The guy had vision...why waste money on something kids won't eat anyway.
Mickey O is finding what our demi-God, Ronald Reagan already knew.....kids hate vegetables. Kids have thrown away some 648 million bucks of our tax dollars....I'm surprised Barack hasn't seized this money for the Illegal Kids for Votes Initiative.
Its a shoe in when we get both houses......
777 fixer
Veteran
- Jul 21, 2004
- 4,792
- 900
La Li Lu Le Lo said:
Will you please stop with the are you okay with Democrats using taxpayer money to buy votes speech. You seem to be under the impression the Republicans don't do the same thing.
The farm bill is a perfect example of this. Most farmers and people in the agriculture business vote republican. You can see this when you look at who represents rural areas used in agriculture. Now the republicans could have ended agricultural subsidies as we know it when they controlled the house, senate and White House. But they didn't. I wonder why that is.
- Banned
- #145
You mean the phone program that Reagan started?
Its ironic you keep pushing it as Obamaphones and it was around way before he took office.
A good lie never hurt a republican huh?
[SIZE=x-large]Q:[/SIZE] Has the Obama administration started a program to use "taxpayer money" to give free cell phones to welfare recipients?
[SIZE=x-large]A:[/SIZE] No. Low-income households have been eligible for discounted telephone service for more than a decade. But the program is funded by telecom companies, not by taxes, and the president has nothing to do with it.
[SIZE=medium]FULL ANSWER[/SIZE][SIZE=medium] [/SIZE]
Welfare recipients, and others, can receive a free cell phone, but the program is not funded by the government or taxpayer money, as the e-mail alleges. And it’s hardly new.
SafeLink is run by a subsidiary of América Móvil, the world’s fourth largest wireless company in terms of subscribers, but it is not paid for directly by the company. Nor is it paid for with "tax payer money," as the e-mail claims. Rather, it is funded through the Universal Service Fund, which is administered by the Universal Service Administrative Company, an independent, not-for-profit corporation set up by the Federal Communications Commission. The USF is sustained by contributions from telecommunications companies such as "long distance companies, local telephone companies, wireless telephone companies, paging companies, and payphone providers." The companies often charge customers to fund their contributions in the form of a universal service fee you might see on your monthly phone bill. The fund is then parceled out to companies, such as América Móvil, that create programs, such as SafeLink, to provide telecommunications service to rural areas and low-income households.
When phone lines were first laid out in the late 19th century, they were not always inter-operable. That is to say the phone service created by one company to serve one town may not have been compatible with the phone service of another company serving a different town nearby. The telecom companies themselves saw the folly in this arrangement, and so in 1913, AT&T committed itself to resolving interconnection problems as part of the "Kingsbury Commitment."
That common goal of universal service became a goal of universal access to service when Congress passed The Telecommunications Act of 1934. The act created the FCC and also included in its preamble a promise "to make available, so far as possible, to all the people of the United States, a rapid, efficient, Nation-wide, and world-wide wire and radio communication service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges.” There was a fear, expressed by telecom companies themselves, that market forces alone might encourage companies to pass on providing service to hard-to-reach places. This would both hurt the people who wouldn’t have service as well as existing customers who wouldn’t be able to reach them. So the new FCC was tasked with promoting this principle of "universal service."
This informal practice was codified when the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) was created as part of the 1996 Telecommunications Act to "ensure all Americans, including low-income consumers and those who live in rural, insular, high cost areas, shall have affordable service and [to] help to connect eligible schools, libraries, and rural health care providers to the global telecommunications network." The USAC includes four programs to serve rural areas, high cost areas, rural health care providers, and schools and libraries. Since 1997, USAC has provided discounted land line service to low-income individuals. (A more limited program to offer assistance to low-income individuals was created a decade earlier; the telecommunications act expanded and formalized it.) According to Eric Iversen, USAC director of external relations, the Universal Service Fund more recently began funding programs that provide wireless service, such as the pre-paid cellular SafeLink program mentioned in the chain e-mail.
The president has no direct impact on the program, and one could hardly call these devices "Obama Phones," as the e-mail author does. This specific program, SafeLink, started under President George Bush, with grants from an independent company created under President Bill Clinton, which was a legacy of an act passed under President Franklin Roosevelt, which was influenced by an agreement reached between telecommunications companies and the administration of President Woodrow Wilson.
Wilson Phones, anyone?
– Justin Bank
Update, Nov. 5: A public relations representative from SafeLink Wireless contacted us to note that the América Móvil subsidiary that operates the SafeLink program and receives funds from the USF is TracFone Wireless, based in Miami, Fla.
Sources
Mueller, Milton. Universal Service: Competition, Interconnection, and Monopoly in the Making of the American Telephone System. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1997.
Press Release, "Research and Markets: America Movil, S.A. de C.V. – Financial and Strategic Analysis Review," Business Wire. 24 Mar 2009.
Government Printing Office, "Federal Register: January 23, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 14)] [Notices] [Page 4199-4201]."
Its ironic you keep pushing it as Obamaphones and it was around way before he took office.
A good lie never hurt a republican huh?
[SIZE=x-large]Q:[/SIZE] Has the Obama administration started a program to use "taxpayer money" to give free cell phones to welfare recipients?
[SIZE=x-large]A:[/SIZE] No. Low-income households have been eligible for discounted telephone service for more than a decade. But the program is funded by telecom companies, not by taxes, and the president has nothing to do with it.
[SIZE=medium]FULL ANSWER[/SIZE][SIZE=medium] [/SIZE]
Welfare recipients, and others, can receive a free cell phone, but the program is not funded by the government or taxpayer money, as the e-mail alleges. And it’s hardly new.
[SIZE=medium]How It Works[/SIZE]
SafeLink Wireless, the program mentioned in the e-mail, does indeed offer a cell phone, about one hour’s worth of calling time per month, and other wireless services like voice mail to eligible low-income households. Applicants have to apply and prove that they are either receiving certain types of government benefits, such as Medicaid, or have household incomes at or below 135 percent of the poverty line. Using 2009 poverty guidelines, that’s $14,620 for an individual and a little under $30,000 for a family of four, with slightly higher amounts for Alaska and Hawaii.SafeLink is run by a subsidiary of América Móvil, the world’s fourth largest wireless company in terms of subscribers, but it is not paid for directly by the company. Nor is it paid for with "tax payer money," as the e-mail claims. Rather, it is funded through the Universal Service Fund, which is administered by the Universal Service Administrative Company, an independent, not-for-profit corporation set up by the Federal Communications Commission. The USF is sustained by contributions from telecommunications companies such as "long distance companies, local telephone companies, wireless telephone companies, paging companies, and payphone providers." The companies often charge customers to fund their contributions in the form of a universal service fee you might see on your monthly phone bill. The fund is then parceled out to companies, such as América Móvil, that create programs, such as SafeLink, to provide telecommunications service to rural areas and low-income households.
[SIZE=medium]History [/SIZE]
The SafeLink program has actually been offering cell phones to low-income households in some states since 2008, not beginning "earlier this year," as the e-mail claims. But the program is rooted in a deeper history.When phone lines were first laid out in the late 19th century, they were not always inter-operable. That is to say the phone service created by one company to serve one town may not have been compatible with the phone service of another company serving a different town nearby. The telecom companies themselves saw the folly in this arrangement, and so in 1913, AT&T committed itself to resolving interconnection problems as part of the "Kingsbury Commitment."
That common goal of universal service became a goal of universal access to service when Congress passed The Telecommunications Act of 1934. The act created the FCC and also included in its preamble a promise "to make available, so far as possible, to all the people of the United States, a rapid, efficient, Nation-wide, and world-wide wire and radio communication service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges.” There was a fear, expressed by telecom companies themselves, that market forces alone might encourage companies to pass on providing service to hard-to-reach places. This would both hurt the people who wouldn’t have service as well as existing customers who wouldn’t be able to reach them. So the new FCC was tasked with promoting this principle of "universal service."
This informal practice was codified when the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) was created as part of the 1996 Telecommunications Act to "ensure all Americans, including low-income consumers and those who live in rural, insular, high cost areas, shall have affordable service and [to] help to connect eligible schools, libraries, and rural health care providers to the global telecommunications network." The USAC includes four programs to serve rural areas, high cost areas, rural health care providers, and schools and libraries. Since 1997, USAC has provided discounted land line service to low-income individuals. (A more limited program to offer assistance to low-income individuals was created a decade earlier; the telecommunications act expanded and formalized it.) According to Eric Iversen, USAC director of external relations, the Universal Service Fund more recently began funding programs that provide wireless service, such as the pre-paid cellular SafeLink program mentioned in the chain e-mail.
The president has no direct impact on the program, and one could hardly call these devices "Obama Phones," as the e-mail author does. This specific program, SafeLink, started under President George Bush, with grants from an independent company created under President Bill Clinton, which was a legacy of an act passed under President Franklin Roosevelt, which was influenced by an agreement reached between telecommunications companies and the administration of President Woodrow Wilson.
Wilson Phones, anyone?
– Justin Bank
Update, Nov. 5: A public relations representative from SafeLink Wireless contacted us to note that the América Móvil subsidiary that operates the SafeLink program and receives funds from the USF is TracFone Wireless, based in Miami, Fla.
Sources
Mueller, Milton. Universal Service: Competition, Interconnection, and Monopoly in the Making of the American Telephone System. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1997.
Press Release, "Research and Markets: America Movil, S.A. de C.V. – Financial and Strategic Analysis Review," Business Wire. 24 Mar 2009.
Government Printing Office, "Federal Register: January 23, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 14)] [Notices] [Page 4199-4201]."
700UW said:
Oh, you're right about that but just like the Community Reinvestment Act signed by Carter...and pushed by Clinton and W......or Clinton signing the Iraq Liberation Act and W going in.....
Obama put the pedal to the metal...or the phone to the ear....LOL
Good point.....
Dog Wonder
Veteran
Hello? The lights are on but nobody is home.
SparrowHawk
Veteran
- Nov 30, 2009
- 7,824
- 2,707
700UW said:
I won't.
"You can keep your plan if you like it"!
Geez, does anyone recall who launched that Whopper of a lie?
First President to preside over a cut to the credit rating of the United States.
I could go on, but I think their are indeed facts that need to be examined. Obama had the opportunity to not continue the phone program, not extend the Patriot Act among others. You can Hope to Change the facts but their is no hope and no change for 6 years now.
