76 Comments - just sayin' - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 10:46 am: Chapin Rose also voted against the school voucher bill last year, a program that would have helped mostly low income black families in Chicago. And vouchers are supposed to be a Republican thing. Is there a pattern here? Just askin’. And isn’t this also the guy who is very concerned about milk crates being used for dorm room furniture? No wonder the GOP can’t convice voters to put them back in power in IL. - Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 10:50 am: You know, I can’t say I have a strong feeling against this idea, but I don’t believe it will lead to any real savings and will instead possibly cost the state more. I think it’s more of a continuation of the whole “welfare queen” myth from the GOP. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 10:56 am: Sanity check: it will cost $4 million to add photos to LINK cards?? Um, yeah, right. I want that contract. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 10:58 am: Hey, how about this: add photos to gun registration ID cards! Everybody gets offended!Win/win! - Pleading the Fifth - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 10:58 am: At a time when the state is looking to cut budget spending this bill will cost approximately $2-4 million of state money just to purchase the equipment to allow the photos on the cards. It doesn’t include the money it will take to staff the machines. All DHS offices are already under-staffed and can’t keep up with the demand. It also limits the number of people that can actually use the card. If Mom/Dad are receiving SNAP, only the person with their photo on the card can use it. - Emanuel Collective - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:00 am: Good thing this bill will either go nowhere in the Senate/Vetoed by the Governor, then! The only effect of this bill is that legislators in conservative districts get to go home in two years and say they fought to eliminate waste and protect your tax dollars. - Emanuel Collective - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:01 am: Anon-There are over 1 million LINK card recipients in the state, and man hours/equipment in processing photos for that many people isn’t going to come cheap. - Ghost - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:02 am: This is a good plan. People sell their link money for around 40 cents on the dollar. There is fraud with the same person having multiple cards under different names because they have cash value to the right people. They have even caught WI residents using IL addresses to get cards. people who need food should get it, but there needs to e a better system so that people who are trading food money for cash, or who have multiple cards are blocked. In my oppinion, if youused the money to hire more frud investigators who would go check on and verify reciepients, verify stores who are taking the cards etc you would be far better served then by putting photos on the cards. - Fed up - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:03 am: To say it will cost 2-4 million to put photos on the link cards is a joke. Fraud is a problem. I’ve been behind people at jewel buying large amounts of groceries with a link card who then go and get in a Lexus. Dems should support enforcement to ensure the most needy get the benefits. - Responsa - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:04 am: I do not understand the hostility toward picture IDs on state debit cards. The technology is available and is already used on regular debit and credit cards and drivers’ licenses. So why not use it for food stamp debit cards, both to to identify and to protect the legitimate users– and at a time when cynicism about government is high to help reassure taxpayers that these benefits are being managed properly and are helping the very people they are supposed to be helping. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:05 am: ===I’ve been behind people at jewel buying large amounts of groceries with a link card who then go and get in a Lexus.=== Apparently, you’ve never been laid off from a job. - Say Cheese! - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:07 am: Anon - photos are already on FOID cards. They use your photo that is on file with the Secretary of State. The same could probably be done with Link cards. - Ghost - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:12 am: I would like to point out the conflicting directions to government….we want to reduce employee’s, cut salaries and pensions…but we want to increase fraud prevention and regualtion. The most direct and efficient way to reduce fraud and waste is to bef up enforcement and fraud investigation units. Amidst the work comp issues one of the things left in the dust is that the work comp fraud unit is so poorl staffed and underfunded, they have no way to look into false claims. Same with link and other services. We can save money and reduce fraud if we increase the antifraud programs. After all, we dont fight crime by cutting the budget to the police, and then asking to put photos on everything hoping people will self enforce. - Leroy - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:12 am: >Apparently, you’ve never been laid off from a job. I was, and I sold my car and took the bus. - Montrose - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:16 am: *So why not use it for food stamp debit cards, both to to identify and to protect the legitimate users* Keep in mind that cards are issued to households. If mom has her picture on the card, then dad cannot use it, their kid helping out with the groceries can’t use it, etc. Also, if I someone with a disability or elderly, a home assistant cannot use my card to help me do me shopping. This is not a simple cut and dry scenario. There were a solid dozen bills of this ilk that were filed this year that looked to demonize people that need supports like SNAP/food stamps. This one just happened to get out of committee. I wish folks like Rose that are so concerned about people misusing such supports put similar energy into finding solutions that would help families not need such supports in the first place. - mythoughtis - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:17 am: I see nothing wrong with photos on the cards. Yes, that would prevent someone else in the household from using it… but the person most likely use it in the house should be one whose picture goes on it. You’re already handing the card to the cashier, your photo is NOT being displayed to the world. Even normal credit card users often get asked to show photo id. As someone who has been approached in the local County Market aisles by strangers offering to sell me their link money, I’n all for Link cards having photo ids. - Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:21 am: - I’ve been behind people at jewel buying large amounts of groceries with a link card who then go and get in a Lexus. - It amazes me that somehow everyone I know who thinks welfare fraud is a huge cost to taxpayers has seen this scenario, yet I never have. Maybe I go to the grocery store at the wrong time. - As someone who has been approached in the local County Market aisles by strangers offering to sell me their link money, I’n all for Link cards having photo ids. - I have seen this. If you’re someone who is willing to go along with this, what’s to stop you from having that person use the link card for your groceries and then giving them cash? Photo wouldn’t do much then. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:25 am: – In making his fraud pitch, Rose pointed to a Michigan case where college students obtained federal loans for their tuition, room and board and also acquired food stamps to buy beer.– Okay. Your point being? –Rose, however, estimated fraud in Illinois’ food-stamp system could reach as much as $1.5 billion, though he did not provide direct evidence during floor debate.– It’s a big-sounding number, though. Would like to the backup. Is there a real expectation that grocery store clerks are going to be the front-line law enforcement here? My wife and I swap debit cards all the time, depending on who’s flush when it’s time to go to the grocery store. Neither of us has ever been questioned using the other’s card. - Responsa - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:25 am: ==dozen bills of this ilk that were filed this year that looked to demonize people that need supports like SNAP/food stamps== So “demonizing” is the only possible reason you can see for why some legislators and many taxpaying citizens might wish to tighten up the process? - Secret Square - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:25 am: Re the issue of multiple people in a LINK/food stamp/SNAP household being able to grocery shop: is there a way that authorized users BESIDES the main user (with the photo ID) could be added to a LINK card, with some other kind of verification such a signature? I know it is possible for more than one person to be authorized to use a credit card, so why could the same not be done for LINK cards? - Kasich Walker, Jr. - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:26 am: Tattoos last longer & are probably cheaper. - mythoughtis - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:26 am: I wasn’t willing and didn’t go along with it, but I would have preferred to be able to do my shopping in peace without being approached in the first place. And I’m sure the several small children that were with this person didn’t want to be there either. I notified the customer service desk, and the clerk said ‘She’s back again’. So seems to be a regular occurrence. - PES123 - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:27 am: I love the the idea. I hope it passes!! Why not also do random drug testing on the individuals who receive assistance from the state. And those who are users would no longer get assistance. Most employers do random drug testing of their employees. I am sure the individuals who really need the assistance would not mind. Then perhaps it would encourage the individuals who are capable of working and choose not to get a job to go out and get one if they knew they could not live off the system their entire life. The individuals who really need the assistance are the ones who get the raw end of the deal. - Judgment Day - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:27 am: “People sell their link money for around 40 cents on the dollar”. That’s about right, based upon the LINK fraud cases the fed’s were handling. As to this not being a problem - sorry, but it is. I actually heard multiple cases being presented, and these weren’t small numbers. You would be amazed at how much cash can be pushed through the LINK program to just a small corner grocery in just a month’s time. - 3rd Generation Chicago - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:28 am: The cost is high to add equipment, and some commentors saying one card per household is something I see causing a lot of problems when other family members shop. When they went to the card, that is supposed to have a PIN number that was supposed to prevent the fraud that they had with the stamps that were easy to sell. Even with another costly fraud preventative measure, it will be a matter of time before that needs a costly update due to people figuring out how to use it fraudulently. The money used to upgrade the cards would be better spent on people who need the food the card buys. - Jimmy CrackCorn - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:29 am: I was listening to the debate yesterday and found it hard to come up with an argument against the proposal. Apparently, so did the Dems who couldn’t muster a real rational point of opposition. Despite having a sound bill and clear majority, Rep. Rose senselessly lost a lot of credibility in my opinion. During the debate, Rep. Dunkin was lost and talking mostly non-sense. But, Rose kind of walked into a trap and completely lost his patience and temper. Not knowing much about Rose I have to say it was a pretty amateurish performance. Sidenote- With regards to his mother’s nice story: How can someone who is accepting food stamps (and probably some combo of: re-education grants/scholarships, childcare grants, affordable housing, and unemployment benefits), at the same time be “bootstraping” themselves up? There is nothing wrong with a taking a helping hand up, when you’ve fallen down. I get peeved at that terms overuse. Can anyone truely say they’ve “bootstrapped” since…oh idk… 1929? - Bill - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:30 am: == My wife and I swap debit cards all the time, depending on who’s flush when it’s time to go to the grocery store.== C’mon Word! You’re both flush all of the time! No LINK cards in the Slinger household! - I'm Just Saying - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:31 am: Sounds like a commerical for Slim Fast, Hi My Name is Chapin Rose, My Friends used to call me Bullish and Large, I used slim fast and i’ve lost 40 pounds, Thank you Slim Fast - Pleading the Fifth - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:31 am: Secret Square - If this bill gets signed into law, the answer is no. Only those that have their photo on the card can use it. This means out of the 1.8 million currently on SNAP, only 850,00 people would be authorized to use the card. At the current moment, if you are a member of a SNAP household, you are authorized to use the card without signature verification. - Montrose - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:36 am: *So “demonizing” is the only possible reason you can see for why some legislators and many taxpaying citizens might wish to tighten up the process?* Nope. Improving how the system works is a good thing. Using the blunt instrument of assuming everyone is committing some sort of fraud rather than cost effective ways to improve the program and help more people is when it becomes demonizing. - cermak_rd - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:37 am: I think the cards are much better fraud prevention than the food stamp coupons were. I don’t have a huge objection to the photo (heck then the user could use it as a form of ID at banks and such), other than the fact that it’s not unusual for older kids to do the shopping for some families so that would cause a nuisance. Maybe they could have multiple cards linked to the same account for each shopper in the family? - amalia - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:40 am: how much will the study cost? administrative measures to act as gates against fraud can help. the question is how much will these measures cost. if the study is not too expensive, it will tell us the choices and the savings. photos could discourage accounts under different names, selling benefits. if I were a rep, a study would inform a decision on such a program. - Springfield Skeptic - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:48 am: I’m not really against it but have you noticed that most stores use swipe terminals now. The check out clerk never handles the card, let alone look at a picture on it. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:49 am: The more I think about it, I don’t think I’ve seen a grocery clerk even handle or look at a LINK or debit card in recent years. Customers just swipe them in the keypad gizmo. Are clerks currently supposed to be verifying identity of card users? Because I don’t think it’s happening. Bill, busted flush, depending on the day of the week. - Jimmy CrackCorn - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:49 am: Also… What would the incentive structure be for the shopkeeper to turn away a user with a suspect picture on the Link card? Unless there is some kind of mandate and punishment in the bill, I can’t really see the clerks at my local convenience stores turning away revenue based on moral duty. Does anyone know? I haven’t read the bill and am having a hard time finding it - John A Logan - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:50 am: I worked at a grocery store for 8 years, did everything from bagging groceries to managing stores. The fraud in the link card system is massive. Parents send children into the store while they sit in the car. the kids use the cards, people show up with 8 or 9 link cards and pieces of paper with the pin numbers taped to them. Shopping for 4 or five different families, the knee jerk opposition to this bill is simply an indicator that those in opposition know the fraud is massive. - Edge of the 14th Ward - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:54 am: Forgive me if I’m being naive (or uninformed), but how would preventing people from selling their LINK cards save the state money? If a household is eligible for SNAP, they receive a certain amount in benefits, right? A beneficiary can’t then go to the state and say, “Hey, I sold my LINK card the other day. Would you issue me another one?” Unless the legislature also wants to change how benefits are determined, then I don’t see how deterring this kind of fraud actually saves the state any money. (Which is not to say that deterring fraud isn’t a good thing in and of itself.) - Jimmy CrackCorn - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:55 am: ==Does anyone know? I haven’t read the bill and am having a hard time finding it == Nevermind found the bill, but didn’t see anything that would motivate clerks to turn people away. - Kasich Walker, Jr. - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:57 am: To Edge of 14th Ward: The state is losing revenue when the Link card seller does not collect sales tax. - cermak_rd - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:58 am: John A. Logan, what’s illegal about sending your kid in with your link card to do the shopping? It may be poor parenting, but, if the card is yours, I fail to see how it’s fraudulent. - earl - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 12:01 pm: Let’s face reality. Link is an alternate currency.If the stores had a system that controlled the accecptable purchases purchases rather than just handing out another currency you might cut down on the fraud.And that 1% figure is bureaucratic bull - wordslinger - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 12:04 pm: Logan, I’m not seeing the outright fraud in your accounts. The kids doing the shopping? I wish. It’s food in the house. A neighbor doing the shopping for other families? I’ve been stuck behind the customer doing that — keeping all the goods and methods of payment separate. It’s frustrating to those in line but it doesn’t seem to be fraudulent on its face. It’s certainly not selling cards for drugs. - Montrose - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 12:05 pm: *And that 1% figure is bureaucratic bull* And if you have something other than anecdotal evidence that fraud is more rampant, please share. Also, everyone should be reminded that food stamp money comes from the feds. I know, I know, it is all our money, but the savings Rose claims, even if it were true, would not be to the state. - L.S. - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 12:08 pm: “Why not also do random drug testing on the individuals who receive assistance from the state. And those who are users would no longer get assistance” So, no more similac and diapers for the kids because mom tested positve for pot when the government came to her home to randomly drug test her becasue she’s on food stamps. Pretty sick world you want to live in PES123. - Bigtwich - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 12:09 pm: People have posted various examples of fraud. I am willing to accept them as true. If someone wants to raise taxes and appropriate money to address them,fine by me. But, I do not see one example where having pictures on a card would save the State of Illinois a penny. The food stamps are 100% Federally funded, administrative cost are split between the State and Federal governments. Leaving that aside, the most common example given was selling food stamp benefits. Not sure a photo would stop that but if it did I do not see it would stop people from getting food stamp benefits and using them themselves. All this bill dose is drive up the administrative cost. - Objective Dem - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 12:16 pm: I don’t think photos on the link card will help that much. As mentioned by others, I don’t think many merchants are going to start turning down sales because they don’t think the photo matches the customer. My sense is some of the merchants are active participants in the fraud. Years ago a friend of friend owned a currency exchanged and routinely bought food stamps at deep discounts. I would think a simpler option would be for people to present a photo id that matches the name on the Link card. But the other issue is that people may legitimately be using another person’s link card. It might be a daughter buying groceries for her parents. The person buying groceries with several link cards could be a volunteer or a hired aide doing the shopping for people unable to shop for themselves. And that volunteer might drive a Lexus. I am all in favor of eliminating fraud from the food stamp/link system. But it should be done in a cost effective and humane manner. - Wumpus - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 12:20 pm: SO what, hurt their feelings if you must. - Ryan from Carrollton - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 12:31 pm: If this passes, then when we pass a bill that requires a photo i.d. to vote the impoverished that everyone worries about not having a photo id will then have one. Write into the bill that it is an acceptable form of identification for voting - Generation X - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 12:45 pm: One easy way to totally eliminate fraud and abuse would be to go back to having Government food stores. Doing so would kill the marketability of of the Link cards for cash - Fed up - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 1:11 pm: Rich No I haven’t been laid off from a job but their is also a difference between unemployment and link. - Objective Dem - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 1:17 pm: Fed up, How do you know the person using Link and driving the Lexus wasn’t a volunteer, family member, or friend buying groceries for someone unable to shop for themselves? - John A Logan - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 1:17 pm: Word and Cermak, as Darth Vader said “I dont share your optimistic appraisal of the situation.” I am sure that some of the people who come in with multiple cards and pin numbers are “shopping for neighbors.” I have a a feeling that a number of those cards are being used without the knowledge of the actual card holder. - Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 1:23 pm: - If the stores had a system that controlled the accecptable purchases purchases rather than just handing out another currency you might cut down on the fraud. - You can’t use Link for just anything. If you could, I think the exchange rate would be a little better than 40 cents to the dollar. - JustMe_JMO - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 1:24 pm: Just how often would a cashier verify the picture? When was the last time one checked your signature on a debit/credit card? As earl said “If the stores had a system that controlled the accecptable purchases” would be a great help. Or if the Link system deducted $’s for non acceptable purchase from next months $’s. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 1:26 pm: – I have a a feeling that a number of those cards are being used without the knowledge of the actual card holder.– How’d they get the pins? Stay away from the Dark Side, John, it just leads to fear and suffering. - Pleading the Fifth - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 1:38 pm: Fed Up - Many of these people had great paying jobs in the past and were able to afford to purchase a nice vehicle and pay it off. Now they may have been recently laid off and are really down on their luck. Yes, the simple solution would be to sell their car, but when you are looking for work, etc, you still need a vehicle to get around as public transportation is not feasible in most areas outside of Chicago. - jerry 101 - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 1:51 pm: “people show up with 8 or 9 link cards and pieces of paper with the pin numbers taped to them. Shopping for 4 or five different families” Ummm…did it ever occur to you that this person may have been a home health care worker, perhaps one who helps seniors who may not be able to get to the grocery under their own power (disabled, no drivers license, no one to drive them)? Maybe that worker stops by 4 or 5 residences a day to pick up the link cards and a shopping list, goes to the store to buy their food, then brings them the food. How do you propose that a disabled person or someone who is otherwise unable to leave their home to go to the grocery go about getting their groceries? I worked in a grocery store (pre-link days) for about 3 years, and the biggest “fraud” I ever saw was a parent who gave each of her kids a $1 stamp to buy a packet of wrigley’s chewing gum (the $0.25 size). Woo-hoo…She netted all of $3!!! This whole proposal is a waste of taxpayer dollars. Even if it did reduce fraud, and there isn’t a compelling reason to believe it will, it won’t save the State a penny. But it will increase costs to the already cash-strapped State. - 47th Ward - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 1:56 pm: ===Maybe that worker stops by 4 or 5 residences a day to pick up the link cards and a shopping list, goes to the store to buy their food, then brings them the food.=== Pea Pod for Poor People? - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 2:01 pm: Seriously, some of y’all need to really do some introspection here. You seem to too easily jump to the conclusion that the poor are breaking the law. - Pot calling kettle - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 2:02 pm: As mentioned above, the cards may be used by family members or by people getting groceries for folks who cannot make it to the store. In addition, it’s a swipe card that often never passes through a clerk’s hands. During yesterday’s debate, Rep. Rose stated that the bill would not require store clerks to ask for the card and check the ID. He said it would be in another bill. So, if the card can be legally used by someone other than the card holder AND store clerks do not handle the card and will not be required to under this bill…What’s the point? Why waste a single state dollar on this? - Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 2:15 pm: - would not require store clerks to ask for the card and check the ID. He said it would be in another bill. - This makes me wonder how Rep. Rose feels about requiring online retailers to collect sales tax. I mean, if he supports requiring cashiers to enforce one law, why not online retailers enforcing another? - Objective Dem - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 2:16 pm: There are a couple of things that bother me about this attempt to put photos on link cards. First, from what I can gather the legislation didn’t start off with the intent of determining how to decrease fraud related to the Link program or understanding best practices in other states. Instead it appears to start with a legislator’s idea that photos will solve the problem. No doubt he will brag about coming up with this common-sense idea to keep welfare frauds from scamming the system. But as a result the state will spend money studying this specific idea rather than studying the most effective solutions. Second, the opposition is being reported in the Sun Times as the Dems trying to stop discrimination against the poor. As a result it looks like the Dems don’t care about welfare fraud. But my impression is the Dems are saying the idea won’t be effective because it doesn’t take into account caretakers and other legitimate cases of people using another person’s card and it won’t stop fraud. I fault the Dems for not broadening the scope of the study. - Pot calling kettle - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 2:22 pm: ==I fault the Dems for not broadening the scope of the study.== The Dems brought this up in debate yesterday, but the debate was cut off when one of the Republican’s called the question. Perhaps it just isn’t being reported clearly enough. - Not So Quick . . . - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 2:53 pm: Do credit cards have photos on them? No, because it would be cost prohibitive, even as a measure to presumably reduce fraud. Pictures on Link cards wouldn’t make a difference in illicit Link card trade/sales. Spend the money on benefits rather than foolhardy measures to “reduce fraud.” Someone must own stock in the photo embossing business . . . - Not So Quick . . . - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 2:57 pm: “So, if the card can be legally used by someone other than the card holder AND store clerks do not handle the card and will not be required to under this bill…What’s the point? Why waste a single state dollar on this?” Exactly. Even if clerk’s were required to handle the card it would still not work. Geeeze. How about somehting like having to enter the holder’s SS# (partial?) into the card scanner instead? Just like credit card users enter zip code to validate a transaction? Not perfect, but it’s a lot better than costly studies and/or useless (and costly)photos . . . - Objective Dem - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 3:08 pm: Pot, I have no doubt that the mainstream media distorted the issue with a combination of bad reporting and desire to write an attention getting story. Plus part of the problem is people like me who skim read an article and then are an expert. But the Dems need to understand that the vast majority of people skim the headlines at best and don’t even read the article. Politics is a large part about perceptions and the Dems are now perceived to be more concerned about the feelings of welfare recipients than combating fraud. - BW - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 4:35 pm: Illinois State University was putting student pictures on ID cards in 1995. I am pretty sure the University did not spend that much money on the program. We loaded money on the card to eat at University dining, Subway, and the Food Court at Bone. I can’t see how it is that complex and costly to add to the State’s Link Card. - Montrose - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 5:07 pm: *Illinois State University was putting student pictures on ID cards in 1995. I am pretty sure the University did not spend that much money on the program. We loaded money on the card to eat at University dining, Subway, and the Food Court at Bone. I can’t see how it is that complex and costly to add to the State’s Link Card.* Does ISU have 1.8 million students and offices all over the state they need to equip? Also, the students paid for that infrastructure with tuition and fees - where will the state get the money? - Retired Non-Union Guy - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 6:28 pm: Couple of facts … Some credit card companies do offer to put your photo on your credit card to stop fraud. LINK can’t be used for things like disposable diapers … believe me, I know, my son & family are unemployed with babies and getting help; we mostly buy them diapers. And some observations: I can’t speak to the current environment, but in the food stamp days my wife was a grocery cashier and saw lots of abuse .. she would come home mad that people on welfare were doing lots better (or at least eating better) than we were with both of us working full time. She tried to speak out against the abuse & apparent fraud and came very close to being fired. I have no problem with putting photos on LINK cards; it’s not like you are issuing a new card every month. And I can see where you could issue multiple cards linked to the same account just like bank debit cards … so that would take care of the need for another person in the family to use the “account”. One other thing the legislature might want to address is the list of items allowed for purchase with a LINK card. I don’t begrudge anyone a few luxuries but, while standing in line at grocery stores, I’ve seen some pretty big what I would call “junk food” purchases made with LINK cards; maybe there should be a sub-account limit on such items? - Fed up - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 7:35 pm: I’ve got no problem with the concept of the link card and I am sure it is an improvement over the old food stamps program. I just wonder why a small improvement would be met with such resistance. If I want to cash a check i need to show ID to board a plane need ID heck to check out a library book I needed a picture Id - The Whole Truth - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 7:56 pm: I have 3 children who have worked in local grocery srores the last 5 years. Their first hand observations put the lie to the “only 1% to 4%” fraud figure. Inthe 3 stores they have worked, fraud looks to be closer to 40% to 50%. - Park - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 8:01 pm: Until advocates of welfare programs accept controls meant to find and eliminate waste, they will have to confront efforts for wholesale cuts in these programs. - Big Bob - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 8:21 pm: SNAP (food stamps) benefits are 100 percent federally funded. Rose’s plan would likely cost the state lots of money but save the state nothing, since it does not pay for SNAP benefits. This whole issue is typical Republican scare tactics regarding underserving poor people, which is a code word for… well, you know the rest of that story. Reagan rode his “welfare queen” story to the White House. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 8:54 pm: –In the 3 stores they have worked, fraud looks to be closer to 40% to 50%.== What did the widespread fraud of the cards being used at grocery stores consist of? - Objective Dem - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:21 pm: I have no doubt that there is fraud with the Link program, but I don’t think a photo on the card is going to make any real difference. The typical grocery store clerk isn’t going to pretend they are a TSA agent and worry about an exact match. I’m also not opposed to the idea of limiting the junk food purchases with the Link card, but again the photo id won’t make any difference here. I have to say that this issue upsets me because it is handled like we are a bunch of kindergartners. Is there fraud? sure, but lets figure out what are best practices to stop/reduce it. Instead we have an idea that was thrown out taht is now treated like the “serious” approach. - Pot calling kettle - Wednesday, Apr 13, 11 @ 11:40 pm: ==In the 3 stores they have worked, fraud looks to be closer to 40% to 50%== My first question: Did they report this travesty? My second question: How did they know the LINK card users were not legit? My observation: I saw someone in shabby clothes use a LINK card at Aldi. Afterword, they got in their 20 year old rusty Ford and drove away… Anecdotal evidence means nothing. You can choose to believe the 1-4% fraud stat or not, but I suspect the government has a good method of determining fraud rates and plenty of incentive to get it right. You can read the latest GAO report here: http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-956T Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.