PDA

View Full Version : Bracing myself for the "have-it-both-ways" crowd (FEMA waste, fraud, and abuse)


patteeu
06-14-2006, 06:42 AM
No doubt, the same people who complained about FEMA taking too long to distribute aid in the aftermath of Katrina will be complaining about the waste, fraud, and abuse that comes with pulling out all the stops to get aid distributed as quickly as possible:


FEMA Funds Spent on Divorce, Sex Change (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060614/D8I7RQ7O1.html)

WASHINGTON (AP) - Houston divorce lawyer Mark Lipkin says he can't recall anyone paying for his services with a FEMA debit card, but congressional investigators say one of his clients did just that.

The $1,000 payment was just one example cited in an audit that concluded that up to $1.4 billion - perhaps as much as 16 percent of the billions of dollars in assistance expended after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita - was spent for bogus reasons.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency also was hoodwinked to pay for season football tickets, a tropical vacation and a sex change operation, the audit found. Prison inmates, a supposed victim who used a New Orleans cemetery for a home address and a person who spent 70 days at a Hawaiian hotel all were able to get taxpayer help, according to evidence that gives a new black eye to the nation's disaster relief agency.

...

KC Jones
06-14-2006, 07:02 AM
In order to help people that really need it, you pretty much have to open your self up to fraud. There are plenty of people out there that will take advantage of every little scrap they can steal. That's why providing the tangibles people need (food, shelter, water, clothing, etc.) tends to be a safer option. Then the fraud you have to worry about is within the management of the organization and how the money is spent. That's much more traceable and fewer people/transactions to audit.

patteeu
06-14-2006, 07:15 AM
In order to help people that really need it, you pretty much have to open your self up to fraud. There are plenty of people out there that will take advantage of every little scrap they can steal. That's why providing the tangibles people need (food, shelter, water, clothing, etc.) tends to be a safer option. Then the fraud you have to worry about is within the management of the organization and how the money is spent. That's much more traceable and fewer people/transactions to audit.

That makes sense to me. I suppose it's harder to hand out those tangibles than to pass out debit cards, but it would eliminate some of the types of fraud this audit has uncovered.

BucEyedPea
06-14-2006, 08:30 AM
One reason why I think a LewRockwell or Mises article had it right:

Give the money to the local groups and charities, including churches with proven past track in expediting such things ( they definitely exist) and have the Feds stay out of it.


Also, such federal aid needs to be reduced as it encourages settlement in risky areas. I know N'awlins was built a long time ago and is different but something needs to be done because people are building closer to the water these days much more.

patteeu
06-14-2006, 09:59 AM
Also, such federal aid needs to be reduced as it encourages settlement in risky areas. I know N'awlins was built a long time ago and is different but something needs to be done because people are building closer to the water these days much more.

I agree with that. It doesn't make sense to keep rebuilding in risky areas. If people can get private insurance then fine, but let's not keep bailing them out with public disaster relief.

Cochise
06-14-2006, 10:28 AM
I agree with that. It doesn't make sense to keep rebuilding in risky areas. If people can get private insurance then fine, but let's not keep bailing them out with public disaster relief.

Amen.

banyon
06-14-2006, 10:49 AM
If these people perpetrated fraud with taxpayer funds, they should be prosecute to the fullest extent possible.

I'm always against fraud and corruption no matter who does it, left or right.

Pitt Gorilla
06-14-2006, 10:53 AM
I agree with that. It doesn't make sense to keep rebuilding in risky areas. If people can get private insurance then fine, but let's not keep bailing them out with public disaster relief.Exactly. I don't see how pumping that much money back into NO is long-term cost-effective. The keeping of the Superdome seems to represent a microcosm of NO's ills.

Duck Dog
06-14-2006, 10:54 AM
If these people perpetrated fraud with taxpayer funds, they should be prosecute to the fullest extent possible.

I'm always against fraud and corruption no matter who does it, left or right.


No shit, ya don't say.

banyon
06-14-2006, 10:57 AM
No shit, ya don't say.

patteeu's thread starter and title seemed to indicate that he thought otherwise.

patteeu
06-14-2006, 11:43 AM
patteeu's thread starter and title seemed to indicate that he thought otherwise.

My thread title was intended to indicate that I expect some Bush bashers to complain about FEMA's lack of controls and the resultant fraud and abuse. So far, I'm happy to see, none of that has surfaced. jAZ, memyselfi, Ugly Duck, Jettio and penchief have yet to weigh in though.

go bowe
06-14-2006, 11:57 AM
My thread title was intended to indicate that I expect some Bush bashers to complain about FEMA's lack of controls and the resultant fraud and abuse. So far, I'm happy to see, none of that has surfaced. jAZ, memyselfi, Ugly Duck, Jettio and penchief have yet to weigh in though.damn fema, anyway...

they can't get anything right... :p

patteeu
06-14-2006, 12:09 PM
damn fema, anyway...

they can't get anything right... :p

I KNEW IT!!!! ROFL