Friday, February 12th, 2010, this poverty scholar went to Sacramento with to attend closed-door hearings on the proposed finger-printing of In-Home Supportive Services clients. The Governor’s spokesbeing explained Himself’s position on the matter thusly: the previously reported “30% IHSS fraud” was the result of budget negotiations between the Leadership Committee—made up of the Speaker of the Assembly, the President of the State Senate, the Majority and Minority Whips of both houses of the state Legislature, and the Governor.
Heckling and laughter broke out in the audience, which included 30-40 directly present members of the disability community—consumers of IHSS—and at least 70 telecommuters. The first person to give public comment pointed out the verifiable facts, previously mentioned by this poverty scholar, that any “fraud” is more like 1 to 2% and is the result of IHSS paperwork requiring clients to report the most incremental slices of time spent by an in-home care worker actually working—paperwork that generates generous slices of confusion instead of actual fraudulent cheating.
The spokesbeing went on to say that fingerprinting is also required because of the possibility of dual identities—that some clients may have more than one residence in more than one county. Can anyone live on $800 or so a month and rent more than one living space? Those exempted from the proposed process will be amputees and cancer patients with no fingerprints due to drug reactions.
Welfare logic strikes again! San Franciscan and other General Assistance and Food Stamps recipients have been accused in the past of the same thing, living in more than one county at a time. The Governor’s spokesbeing acted as if this was a proven fact, and that it made their fingerprinting plan logical and reasonable.
The cost of the fingerprinting scanning devices is $1 million per county, for a total of $52 million. Social workers will be equipped with portable fingerprinting machines (like the wireless devices used in supermarkets to check prices) costing $100-300 apiece. The digital cameras, for the photograph accompanying the fingerprints (the spokesbeing referred to them by name as Polaroids, which have become endangered and/or extinct), will cost tax payers at least $30 apiece.
One of the telecommuters said emotionally/mentally disabled folks, who have problems with paranoia, or with inability to leave their homes, will not be welcoming to county workers appearing for fingerprinting visits. The spokesbeing said they could have a doctor’s letter stating this in their file and their psychiatric workers could convince them to cooperate.
There was more laughter at this response, and this poverty scholar left the chamber to avoid adding to it (though I had to explain myself to people in the hall outside). There will be more on this issue in future articles.