Is This True?

[DeepGreen]

The Obama Phone Sent by a friend and wanted to know if anyone else had heard about this "redistribution" of wealth program.

"Not in Texas……yet……but it is coming.

Something else we are paying for!!!!!

I had a former employee call me earlier today inquiring about a job, and at the end of the conversation he gave me his phone number. I asked the former employee if this was a new cell phone number and he told me yes this was his “Obama phone.” I asked him what an “Obama phone” was and he went on to say that welfare recipients are now eligible to receive (1) a FREE new phone and (2) approx 70 minutes of FREE minutes every month.

I was a little skeptical so I Googled it and low and behold he was telling the truth. TAX PAYER MONEY IS BEING REDISTRIBUTED TO WELFARE RECIPIENTS FOR FREE CELL PHONES. This program was started earlier this year. Enough is enough. The very foundations that this country was built on are being shaken. The age old concepts of God, family, and hard work have flown out the window. You can click on the link below to read more about the “Obama phone”….

I wonder how many drug deals are made on these phones?? We should have drug testing for the free phone recipients don't you think?? Like welfare in general .... if they have enough money for illegal drugs ... they should be dropped from the roles we have to pay for ...

Cell Phone

[NT03]

f'n ridiculous

[adman]

The Obama Phone Sent by a friend and wanted to know if anyone else had heard about this "redistribution" of wealth program.

Cell Phone

This was started before Obama was elected.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/cellphone.asp

[Censored by Laurie]

This was started before Obama was elected.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/cellphone.asp

[KRAM1]

It appears to be true, but I do believe there are some "restrictions" placed on the measure that are not spelled out in this email. In any event...this is plain stupid. Just goes to show how "detached" the folks in DC are to the people they say they represent and what can happen to one's "brain" and common sense after spending a couple of years in DC.

[eeally]

Started under BUSH.............

Contracts with cell phone companies....huh how did that happen?

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

--- We need to need to check everything that Obama haters claim... this week I have getting emails about people having to to pay income tax on benefits from the "clunker program"... It too is false. -Actually we can declare the "sales tax or new car tax" as a deduction. Those haters just can't accept the fact they actually got less votes and lost the election to as person that was very unlikely to win considering his background and even his name. .... maybe not next time but this time they did. Dropping to Dow 5000-6000 points in 2008 and wreaking the economy in 2008 did not help them plus being in a war that now seems very unjustified really hurt. ... what WMD.???.... we still (years later) have not found anything of note. Their credibility of being conservative (then doubling the national debt) , morally superior (page boys, restrooms, and now Argentina) , and the WMD claims ruined them plus the economic woes of 2008.

---By the way the "clunker program" existed in parts of Europe before it started here.

Edited November 5, 2009 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

f'n ridiculous

--All these hair brained stories are ---especially when they credit the wrong person with starting it.

--Some people are very gullible and will believe anything that are told because "they want it to be true".

Edited November 5, 2009 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[yyz28]

Well, to be honest with you, I don't care who started it, added the amendment to the bill, voted for the bill or signed the bill. It's a BAD BILL, and now that it has been uncovered, it should be eliminated. What are we DOING paying for phones for people who can't afford them for themselves?!?! The waste in Federal Government, no matter WHO (Republican or Democrat) is running it is beyond most people's ability to comprehend. ...yet, some of you want them to run 1/6th of the economy by taking over healthcare, cause they run the other things they do SOOOOOOO well.

Friggin' politicians.

Screaming Eagle - I DO agree with you regarding these "Obama's Evil" e-mails and crap floating around. ...but don't assume that all of us who don't like his policies believe all this crap. It isn't the rank and file, it's the fringe - and when you consider the President's rhetoric and proposals, things like this sound like they sorta fit. It is EASY to believe.

[FirefightnRick]

This was started before Obama was elected.

Yeah, way before.

Per the FCC website.

http://www.fcc.gov/wcb/tapd/universal_service/

Universal Service

The goals of Universal Service, as mandated by the 1996 Act, are to:

Promote the availability of quality services at just, reasonable and affordable rates for all consumers

Increase nationwide access to advanced telecommunications services

Advance the availability of such services to all consumers, including those in low income, rural, insular, and high cost areas at rates that are reasonably comparable to those charged in urban areas

Increase access to telecommunications and advanced services in schools, libraries and rural health care facilities

Provide equitable and non-discriminatory contributions from all providers of telecommunications services to the fund supporting universal service programs

The Commission established four programs to fulfill these goals. They are:

The High-Cost program

The Low Income program, including initiatives for Native Americans

The Schools and Libraries program, commonly referred to as E-rate

The Rural Health Care program

These programs are funded by the Universal Service Fund. Telecommunications providers must contribute to the fund through an assessment on their interstate and international revenues. The Commission appointed the Universal Service Administrative Company, or USAC, to administer the four programs and the Universal Service Fund.

Rick

[yyz28]

See, we can all be pissed. Created by a Republican Congress, signed by a Democratic President. Equal opportunity to dump on Politicians. See, we CAN agree!

[hickoryhouse]

--- We need to need to check everything that Obama haters claim... Those haters just can't accept the fact they actually got less votes and lost the election

Coul just be me but this sounds exactly the same as what was going on while the previous administration was in office, just a shoe on the other foot type of deal... People were saying that Bush was going to reinstate the draft amongst many other hateful and spiteful things while he was in office just because they didn't like the fact that their guy lost.

I don't see a difference. I really don't.

[UNT90]

People need to understand that the federal goverment does very few things well. That is why the founders of this country envisioned limited government that performed basic duties (law enforcement, military, etc...). Argue all you want about what party was in power when this asinine policy was put into place, the fact is it would have happened under either party. Why? Because it was probably a very small section of an add-on item to a bill that politicians considered too important not to pass. These politicians probably never read the very small section of the add-on item, thus never even knew they were creating this program. Just another example of how government is too big and why we don't need these people in control of health care.

The real people in power are those who write the bills. Yep, those 20-something, no life experience, fresh out of college, completely idealistic staffers who are given broad guidelines.

[UNTFan23]

Because it was probably a very small section of an add-on item to a bill that politicians considered too important not to pass. These politicians probably never read the very small section of the add-on item, thus never even knew they were creating this program.

I wish someone would add on to a bill to make it illegal to add on to a bill if it is not germane to the topic or spirit of said bill.

[forevereagle]

I wish someone would add on to a bill to make it illegal to add on to a bill if it is not germane to the topic or spirit of said bill.

But wouldn't that itself violate the law it aims to create?

[UNTFan23]

But wouldn't that itself violate the law it aims to create?

I'm sure there would be a clause preventing it from being illegal in the first place by adding to the bill making it illegal to add on to bills even though the add on to the bill is not germane to the topic or spirit of the original bill.

[UNT90]

I'm sure there would be a clause preventing it from being illegal in the first place by adding to the bill making it illegal to add on to bills even though the add on to the bill is not germane to the topic or spirit of the original bill.

Are you an ex-congressman?

[UNTflyer]

--Some people are very gullible and will believe anything that are told because "they want it to be true".

Kind of like your repeated claim that there were no WMDs in Iraq? Despite being proven wrong on this message board, and who knows how many others?

[untgirl04]

It appears to be true, but I do believe there are some "restrictions" placed on the measure that are not spelled out in this email. In any event...this is plain stupid. Just goes to show how "detached" the folks in DC are to the people they say they represent and what can happen to one's "brain" and common sense after spending a couple of years in DC.

I disagree with you, to a point, about whether or not the cell phone idea is stupid. I think the spirit of the law (I'm basing this theory off the fact that there are only 70 minutes paid for each month) is to assist those without permanent addresses in finding a job. It may have been a while since you applied for a job, but at least at my company, all candidates get a phone screening before they get called in for an interview. Pay phones are pretty scarce nowadays, and even if they weren't, it wouldn't look too good to be doing an interview in a noisy area, or where the operator butts in every 15 minutes and asks you to deposit another quarter.

And consider the scenario where this person actually does have a job that just pays poorly. Many employers have rules against accepting personal calls at work, and if you're on welfare, you shouldn't be paying for extraneous services like cell phones (or maybe even home phones). And if you think homeless people are just lazy, consider that 44% of homeless people have jobs. (Read the research behind this here.)

Now, I'm not in support of a welfare state, nor do I really like welfare in general (I think community organizations should take a greater role in providing for those in need). However, the US made its welfare bed well before I was born, and if we're going to be helping people out, at least this is a somewhat thoughtful and creative way to assist people. I'm not arguing that some people don't abuse the system, but overall, I think the spirit of this law was in the right place and that it's misguided, but not stupid.

[UNT90]

I disagree with you, to a point, about whether or not the cell phone idea is stupid. I think the spirit of the law (I'm basing this theory off the fact that there are only 70 minutes paid for each month) is to assist those without permanent addresses in finding a job. It may have been a while since you applied for a job, but at least at my company, all candidates get a phone screening before they get called in for an interview. Pay phones are pretty scarce nowadays, and even if they weren't, it wouldn't look too good to be doing an interview in a noisy area, or where the operator butts in every 15 minutes and asks you to deposit another quarter.

And consider the scenario where this person actually does have a job that just pays poorly. Many employers have rules against accepting personal calls at work, and if you're on welfare, you shouldn't be paying for extraneous services like cell phones (or maybe even home phones). And if you think homeless people are just lazy, consider that 44% of homeless people have jobs. (Read the research behind this here.)

Now, I'm not in support of a welfare state, nor do I really like welfare in general (I think community organizations should take a greater role in providing for those in need). However, the US made its welfare bed well before I was born, and if we're going to be helping people out, at least this is a somewhat thoughtful and creative way to assist people. I'm not arguing that some people don't abuse the system, but overall, I think the spirit of this law was in the right place and that it's misguided, but not stupid.

First off, I'm sure the "National Coalition for the Homeless" would consider standing by a road carrying an advertising sign a job, despite the fact that the homeless person carrying this sign takes his daily wages and spends it all on booze/drugs.

I'm not saying this is all of the homeless, I'm just saying that the people who conducted this study would consider that a job.

I don't think the chronically homeless are lazy, I think they are mentally ill/drug or alcohol addicted. Otherwise, with all the programs available, they wouldn't be homeless.

This is a stupid program that every crack/meth dealer will take advantage of, if they are smart enough to find out about it.