bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Fri 10 Oct, 2014 10:40 am
@Baldimo,
Coy. They didn't have widespread cellphone under Reagan. Don't tell me, you don't know about Ronnie-phones? Your misnamed cellphone program started with more primitive devices under Ronald Reagan. You didn't know that?

George W Bush added cell phones to the mix.
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Fri 10 Oct, 2014 10:49 am
@coldjoint,
You're still a Ronnie-phone denier????? Bush is the President who added Cell phone!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

All right, here it is:

http://www.monroenews.com/news/2013/jan/15/theyre-reagan-phones-not-obama-phones/

They’re Reagan phones, not Obama phones

By Paula Wethington
January 15, 2013, 09:31 a.m.

There’s been a lot of social commentary and criticism lately about a discounted or free telephone program for low income people that has picked up the nickname “Obama phones.” But did you know the history of this program dates to two previous presidents? And the service isn’t funded by taxpayer dollars. The discounted, sometimes free, wireless services that started to become available to low income households in 2005, under George W. Bush’s administration, is an expanded and updated version of the Lifeline telephone service program that launched in 1985, under Ronald Reagan’s administration. The Lifeline program, as explained by the Federal Communications Commission at www.fcc.gov/lifeline, is this: Each eligible low-income household can sign up for one phone line. This can be landline or wireless, or in some cases, Voice over Internet Protocol (VOIP). While the program originally was designed for discounted basic service, some wireless providers have decided to include additional features, such as free texting within certain limits or even free phones. The income cutoff in Michigan is 150 percent of poverty or the equivalent of $34,575 for four people. That means many of those who qualify are working poor. Consider this: Two wage earners working full time at the Michigan minimum wage of $7.40 an hour have a household income of $30,784. Any family that receives free school lunches or food stamps is well under the 150 percent poverty bracket, which explains why those programs often are mentioned as eligibility criteria. Eligible individuals are told to contact individual phone companies for application details. Dozens of landline carriers and seven wireless carriers provide Lifeline connections to Michigan residents. advertisement Additional information is available at the Lifeline Web site at www.lifelinesupport.org or by calling the Michigan Public Service Commission at (800) 292-9555. Many people think the money for the program comes from taxpayers’ pockets. It doesn’t. The money to fund Lifeline and related telecommunications access projects comes from the phone companies. Some of the financial support happens through taxes those companies are required to pay to the Universal Service Fund. The Universal Service Administrative Co., which is an independent, not-for-profit corporation, administers the fund. The FCC reports that it is aware that some companies do include a line item on customer bills for that fund. “The FCC does not require this charge to be passed on to customers. Each company makes a business decision about whether and how to assess charges to recover its Universal Service costs,” the commission states. The Monroe on a Budget column runs Tuesdays in The Monroe Evening News. The companion blog is at www.monroeonabudget.com.

Read more at: http://www.monroenews.com/news/2013/jan/15/theyre-reagan-phones-not-obama-phones/

http://www.fcc.gov/lifeline

Since 1985, the Lifeline program has provided a discount on phone service for qualifying low-income consumers to ensure that all Americans have the opportunities and security that phone service brings, including being able to connect to jobs, family and emergency services. In 2005, Lifeline discounts were made available to qualifying low-income consumers on pre-paid wireless service plans in addition to traditional landline service. Lifeline is part of the Universal Service Fund.

The Lifeline program is available to eligible low-income consumers in every state, territory, commonwealth, and on Tribal lands. Consumers with proper proof of eligibility may be qualified to enroll.

To participate in the program, consumers must either have an income that is at or below 135% of the federal Poverty Guidelines or participate in one of the following assistance programs:

Medicaid;
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Food Stamps or SNAP);
Supplemental Security Income (SSI);
Federal Public House Assistance (Section 8);
Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP);
Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF);
National School Lunch Program's Free Lunch Program;
Bureau of Indian Affairs General Assistance;
Tribally-Administered Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TTANF);
Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR);
Head Start (if income eligibility criteria are met); or
State assistance programs (if applicable).

Federal rules prohibit eligible low-income consumers from receiving more than one Lifeline discount per household. An eligible consumer may receive a discount on either a wireline or wireless service, but not both. A consumer whose household currently is receiving more than one Lifeline service must select a single Lifeline provider and contact the other provider to de-enroll from their program. Consumers violating this rule may also be subject to criminal and/or civil penalties.

The Lifeline program is administered by the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC). USAC is responsible for data collection and maintenance, support calculation, and disbursement for the low-income program. USAC’s website provides information regarding administrative aspects of the low-income program, as well as program requirements.

On January 31, 2012, the Commission adopted comprehensive reform and modernization of the Lifeline program. As a universal service program that fulfills Congress’s mandate to ensure the availability of communications to all Americans, Lifeline for the past 25 years has helped tens of millions of low-income Americans afford basic phone service. Access to telephone service is essential for finding a job, connecting with family, or getting help in an emergency, and the percentage of low-income households with phone service has increased from 80% in 1985, when Lifeline began, to nearly 92% last year.

Highlights of FCC’s Lifeline reforms :

Changes to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse, saving up to $2 billion over 3 years

Setting a savings target of $200 million for 2012, and putting the Commission in a position to adopt an appropriate budget for the program in early 2013 after review of a six-month report and one-year report on the effects of the Order.
Creation of a National Lifeline Accountability Database to prevent multiple carriers from receiving support for the same subscriber. The database will build on FCC efforts in 2011 that eliminated nearly 270,000 duplicate subscriptions in 12 states following review of over 3.6 million subscriber records, saving $33 million.
Creation of eligibility databases from governmental data sources, enabling fully automated verification of consumers’ initial and ongoing Lifeline eligibility. This would reduce the potential for fraud while cutting red tape for consumers and providers. A database based on the three most common federal benefit programs through which consumers qualify for Lifeline will be created no later than the end of 2013.
Establishing a one-per-household rule applicable to all providers in the program, defining household as an “economic unit” so that separate low-income families living at the same address can get connected.
Establishing clear goals and metrics to measure program performance and effectiveness.
Phasing out support for services such as Toll Limitation – subsidies to carriers for blocking or restricting long-distance service—and ending Link Up – subsidies to carriers for initial connection charges. Link Up will continue in Tribal lands.
Reducing burdens on carriers by establishing a uniform, interim flat rate of reimbursement, allowing carriers to obtain a subscriber’s signature electronically, and streamlining enrollment through uniform, nationwide eligibility criteria.

Modernizing Lifeline

Adopting an express goal for the program of ensuring availability of broadband for all low-income Americans.
Establish a Broadband Adoption Pilot Program using up to $25 million in savings from other reforms to test and determine how Lifeline can best be used to increase broadband adoption among Lifeline-eligible consumers. Starting this year, the program will solicit applications from broadband providers and will select a number of projects to fund. Lifeline will help reduce the monthly cost of broadband service, but applicants will be expected to help address other challenges to broadband adoption, including the cost of devices and digital literacy.
Proposes increasing digital literacy training at libraries and schools. A Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeks comment on using savings from other Universal Service Fund reforms to increase digital literacy training at libraries and schools, a key step in increasing broadband adoption.
Build on FCC efforts to close the broadband adoption gap and address digital literacy, including the Connect-to-Compete initiative, which enlists government, non-profit, and private sector leaders to address broadband adoption barriers through digital literacy training and low-cost broadband availability.
Allow Lifeline support for bundled services plans combining voice and broadband or packages including optional calling features.

0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  -1  
Fri 10 Oct, 2014 10:53 am
@bobsal u1553115,
How can they be called Ronnie phones when there were hardly any cell phones when Reagan was in office. Only rich people could afford the new technology in the 80's. So to call it a Ronnie phone would be wrong. An article I have recently read said if anything, they would be Wilson phones.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/10/the-obama-phone/

They are only called Obamaphones because of a user who called them Obama phones and was telling someone to "Go get you an Obamaphone." It was one of his voters who created the phrase.
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Fri 10 Oct, 2014 11:05 am
@Baldimo,
Wiggle around all you want, it all started with Ronnie. W added cell phones to the mix. They're at least W-phones, right? You do know part of the reason they went to cell phones was because of homeless vets and homeless families, right?

The name may have started that way, but you teapartiers spread it around to mislead and misinform. I'm all for calling them Ronnie-phones because thats where they started and because it was a rare early example of "compassionate conservatism" which is a rare, rare bird in these AynRandian days of conservative greed and hate.
Baldimo
 
  1  
Fri 10 Oct, 2014 11:11 am
@bobsal u1553115,
I'm not wiggling. I'm providing some fact. As I noted, the phrase Obamaphone got picked up because of one of HIS voters, not anyone else. Everyone else just ran with it.

Call it what you want, I don't really care. Ronniephone, Bushphone, Clintonphone, Obamaphone or Wilsonphone. I really don't care. I was just pointing out that calling it a Ronniephone was impossible since there were no wide use of cellphones at that time. Wanna call it a Bushphone? Be my guest, I won't hassle you for it.
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Fri 10 Oct, 2014 11:23 am
@Baldimo,
And thats as close to admitting you may not have known about the genesis as I'll get and its good enough. To be honest, I knew nothing about the whole thing until I heard the expression "Obama" phone. And researched it.

A more honest and accurate expression would be "help" phones, because by and large, thats what is does for the homeless and the housebound. And it costs the Fed and the taxpayers nothing.

You know that only one company, a Mexican one accepted the challenge to supply these and they makes it work from the fees charged the phone holders.
Baldimo
 
  -1  
Fri 10 Oct, 2014 11:28 am
@bobsal u1553115,
It costs the taxpayers. We all have the Universal Lifeline fee on our home phones and cell phones. Check it out. Nothing is free in this world and someone always pays for it.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Fri 10 Oct, 2014 12:01 pm
@Baldimo,
You wrote,
Quote:
Nothing is free in this world and someone always pays for it.


Can you identify who that 'someone' is? In the larger scheme of things, you're being net-picky about about details that really doesn't matter since we have no control over what governments do with spending.

Taxes on phone use? LMAO
Baldimo
 
  0  
Fri 10 Oct, 2014 12:06 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Try reading it again CI. I said the fee's were covered from the Universal Lifeline servce WE all pay on our home phones and our cell phones.
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Fri 10 Oct, 2014 12:12 pm
@Baldimo,
Read my post on Ronnie-phones, again.

Many people think the money for the program comes from taxpayers’ pockets. It doesn’t. The money to fund Lifeline and related telecommunications access projects comes from the phone companies. Some of the financial support happens through taxes those companies are required to pay to the Universal Service Fund. The Universal Service Administrative Co., which is an independent, not-for-profit corporation, administers the fund. The FCC reports that it is aware that some companies do include a line item on customer bills for that fund. “The FCC does not require this charge to be passed on to customers. Each company makes a business decision about whether and how to assess charges to recover its Universal Service costs,” the commission states. The Monroe on a Budget column runs Tuesdays in The Monroe Evening News. The companion blog is at www.monroeonabudget.com.

The Mexican company doesn't charge back and they provide 80% of the phones or more.

Any other of your misconceptions I can clear up for you?
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Fri 10 Oct, 2014 12:14 pm
@Baldimo,
But could be true, but by and large, isn't. Your statement is wrong. Nothing personal.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Fri 10 Oct, 2014 12:32 pm
GOP Candidate: I'm actually winning if you don't count single moms.
The Republican challenger to Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) on Thursday blamed his double-digit lag in the polls on single women and mothers who vote Democratic because they are "wed" to the social safety net and "need benefits to survive."

Jeff Bell told the Asbury Park Press that it's that government-dependent female demographic, not his socially conservative views on issues like abortion and access to contraception, that is weighing him down.

"I've done a lot of thinking about this and looked at a lot of different polls, I think it has more to do with the rise in single women," he explained. "Single mothers particularly are automatically Democratic because of the benefits. They need benefits to survive, and so that kind of weds them to the Democratic Party."

"But single women who have never married and don't have children are also that way," he added. "If you take married women, they aren't that different from married men. So it's really a problem with the decline in marriage rates. The Democrats do benefit from that."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/jeff-bell-single-mothers
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Fri 10 Oct, 2014 12:35 pm
Florida cop fired for having Trayvon Martin shooting targets
http://www.yourblackworld.net/florida-cop-fired-for-having-trayvon-martin-shooting-targets/

A Florida police officer was fired for having Trayvon Martin shooting targets , according to CNN.

Sgt. Ron King of Port Canaveral Police Department was permanently relieved from duty after an investigation revealed that King offered the Trayvon Martin hoodie range targets to two of his fellow officers.

John Walsh, interim CEO of the Canaveral Port Authority, said the two officers saw the shooting targets in King’s vehicle but turned down the offer.

“Port Canaveral Police Department considers that behavior unacceptable,” Walsh said of King’s conduct.

cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Fri 10 Oct, 2014 02:17 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
Who says blacks aren't targeted by the police?

coldjoint
 
  -2  
Fri 10 Oct, 2014 02:22 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Who says blacks aren't targeted by the police?


Who says the blacks sell drugs and have put a target on their own backs. I do.
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Fri 10 Oct, 2014 02:25 pm
@coldjoint,
Just blacks, right? How is that not racist, sparky.
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Fri 10 Oct, 2014 02:25 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cj.
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Fri 10 Oct, 2014 02:33 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
Quote:
Just blacks, right? How is that not racist, sparky.


It is not racist because it is a fact. Facts don't come in colors.
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Fri 10 Oct, 2014 03:20 pm
@coldjoint,
That's not a fact. Its your opinion. Unbacked by any sort of fact. If thats so true, why can't the cops shoot any drug dealers? Just kids and old people.

I can prove that.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  4  
Fri 10 Oct, 2014 03:26 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
I have icebrain or IGNORE.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 01/10/2025 at 02:58:54