Obama Administration Squanders $100 Million Paying Electric Bills of Dead People

posted at 12:21 pm on July 2, 2010 by

So this is what Barack Obama meant when he promised to change the way business was done in Washington: Take a bad situation and make it immeasurably worse.

The Associated Press reports that the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, a federal program designed to help poor families heat and cool their homes, wasted more than $100 million of taxpayers’ money paying the electric bills of people who were (a) dead, (b) in prison, or (c) living in million-dollar mansions.

According to the non-partisan Government Accountability Office, the program, which is under the aegis of the Department of Health and Human Services, spent $5 billion in 2009, distributing funds to states. The operation was carried out with almost no oversight. As a result, your tax dollars helped, for example, to defray the electricity costs of a woman who lives in a $2 million home in a tony Chicago suburb and drives a Mercedes.

The GAO got wind of the problem following an investigation by Pennsylvania’s state auditor in 2007, which revealed that 429 applicants received more than $162,000 by using the Social Security numbers of dead people. Similarly improper payments have since been uncovered in seven other states, including Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, and Virginia. All told, about 9 percent of funds from the program totaling $116 million ended up in the pockets of  unqualified individuals.

Although individual states bear the brunt of the responsibility for ensuring that federal funds are properly allocated, the study determined that lax supervision by HHS was a key contributing factor in the scam.

Follow me on Twitter or join me at Facebook. You can reach me at howard.portnoy@gmail.com or by posting a comment below.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Mr Portnoy, as you’ve not provided any link to study, I’ll provide a link to the AP story.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gx5yIc9T4UTzCTmusin2EAy7RewwD9GMCFIO3

It definitely did not say that lax supervision by HHS was a “key contributing factor”

Although individual states are primarily responsible for preventing the fraud, the study found lax oversight by HHS and little guidance on how to do so. Illinois, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, and West Virginia said they had trouble finding records to validate Social Security numbers and verify income.
Several state officials said they typically don’t investigate or prosecute fraud in the program because the amount of money paid to each resident is so low.

audiculous on July 2, 2010 at 2:24 PM

It is my experience with bureaucracies, local, state and federal, that they don’t care enough about monitoring funds, waste or fraud enough to be effective whatsoever. Personally I wouldn’t put them in charge of a stool sample.

Robert17 on July 2, 2010 at 3:06 PM

Personally I wouldn’t put them in charge of a stool sample.

Robert17 on July 2, 2010 at 3:06 PM

Which does raise the question of what you end up doing with them.

audiculous on July 2, 2010 at 3:19 PM

Your comment:

It definitely did not say that lax supervision by HHS was a “key contributing factor”

AP’s statement:

Although individual states are primarily responsible for preventing the fraud, the study found lax oversight by HHS and little guidance on how to do so.

What on earth is your point, if any?

Howard Portnoy on July 2, 2010 at 3:29 PM

And for what it’s worth, ridiculous, you haven’t provided a link to the study, either. Just another article on the same topic.

Howard Portnoy on July 2, 2010 at 3:32 PM

Howard Portnoy

I see that you’re attempting to twist things.

The fraud was a failure on the state level, clearly

Your headline is an absurdity and your post is a foolish attempt to ascribe responsibility to suit your prejudice.

audiculous on July 2, 2010 at 3:35 PM

other than that, it was very nice.

audiculous on July 2, 2010 at 3:35 PM

you haven’t provided a link to the study, either. Just another article on the same topic.

Howard Portnoy on July 2, 2010 at 3:32 PM

I do believe that is exactly what I said that i was doing, Mr Portnoy.

audiculous on July 2, 2010 at 3:40 PM

Although individual states are primarily responsible for preventing the fraud, the study found lax oversight by HHS and little guidance on how to do so

audiculous on July 2, 2010 at 2:24 PM

It definitely did not say that lax supervision by HHS was a “key contributing factor”

It depends on what the meaning of is is. Oops should substituted key for the first is.

chemman on July 2, 2010 at 5:14 PM