# Growing Lifeline Program Is Costing American Consumers and Taxpayers



## LGriffin (Apr 2, 2009)

*WASHINGTON - *Congressman Tim Griffin (AR-02) issued the following statement after introducing the Stop Taxpayer Funded Cell Phones Act (H.R.3481), which will save American consumers billions of dollars in a program many view as an example of government waste:
"I have heard from numerous Arkansans who have shared stories of dead relatives receiving free cell phones in the mail, individuals abusing the system by obtaining numerous free cell phones and recently I saw an electronic kiosk in a convenience store promoting free cell phones, all through a government run and taxpayer funded program called Lifeline. My bill returns the Lifeline program back to its original structure by ending federal subsidies for free cell phone services. This growing government cell phone program is costing American consumers and taxpayers, and my bill puts an end to it."
The Lifeline Program was established in 1984 to subsidize landline phone service for low-income individuals. Under the program, telecommunications carriers submit reimbursement requests to the government-run Universal Service Fund (USF) to receive a subsidy for services provided to qualifying low-income subscribers. *The USF is funded through fees collected from telecommunications carriers which are directly passed onto their customers,* as part their telephone bill.
In 2008, the Lifeline Program was expanded to include wireless service providers. Between 2008 and 2009, non-landline costs for the program doubled - from $143 million to $384 million - and then doubled again, totaling over $719 million in 2010. Before the certification of the first wireless carrier, the overall Lifeline Program cost $822 million per year, an amount consistent with the previous five years. That number grew to $1.025 billion in 2009 and to $1.315 billion in 2010. According to the Federal Communications Commission, it is common for multiple wireless service providers to seek reimbursement for Lifeline services provided to the same household.
http://griffin.house.gov/press-rele...gram-costing-american-consumers-and-taxpayers

Write your Rep.! We all know that the actual cost is well over a billion when you consider what these phones are really used for on the street.


----------



## CJIS (Mar 12, 2005)

Get rid of it maybe... Reform it definitely. Only those that need it should get it and I think they should have to be Elderly and on SS. They should also have to go in person to get it like at the Socail Security office or something. I know a few deserving people that have these phones. Both are elderly and one of them is in ther mid 80s and has little money to even pay the bills they have.

Part of the criteria should be that the person should be collecting SS, have an income less than _____ and the phone be the most basic of phones with a small amount of min.

If that does not drive the costs down than dump the program. Its just too bad that it is the elderly most of whom have contributed much to the country that get shaffted because of Aholes that abuse the system.


----------



## HistoryHound (Aug 30, 2008)

Does an elderly person really need a cell phone? I can see subsidizing a land line, but that's about it. If the cell phone is truly for emergencies; then, it should be basic and pre-programmed to dial 911 and maybe one or two emergency contact #s like a doctor's office. I say scrap the program, but if they're going to keep it give them the types of phones that you can get for young kids. I can't remember who made it, but I'm pretty sure I saw a phone a while back that would only dial three or four pre-programmed numbers to keep kids from making unapproved calls. Limit to them to a plan than that only has about an hour a month free. That's all they need if the phone is really for emergencies.


----------



## LGriffin (Apr 2, 2009)

USMCMP5811 said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong but, Don't all cell phones, weather they are active or not, MUST be able to dial and complete a 911 call?


Yes, but trying to make sense isn't going to get you anywhere with libtards.


----------



## CJIS (Mar 12, 2005)

HistoryHound said:


> Does an elderly person really need a cell phone? I can see subsidizing a land line, but that's about it. If the cell phone is truly for emergencies; then, it should be basic and pre-programmed to dial 911 and maybe one or two emergency contact #s like a doctor's office. I say scrap the program, but if they're going to keep it give them the types of phones that you can get for young kids. I can't remember who made it, but I'm pretty sure I saw a phone a while back that would only dial three or four pre-programmed numbers to keep kids from making unapproved calls. Limit to them to a plan than that only has about an hour a month free. That's all they need if the phone is really for emergencies.


Thats basically what I was trying to say.


----------

