Paying Dead Retirees

[patrickt]

"The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) erroneously paid $274 million in benefits to deceased federal retirees over the past three years, including $84.7 million in 2013 alone, according to the agency’s annual financial report.OPM’s FY 2013 financial report (http://www.opm.gov/about-us/budget-performance/performance/2013-agency-financial-report.pdf?nocache=2) released in mid-December revealed that improper “overpayments” to deceased federal annuitants under its retirement program reached $102.9 million in FY 2011, $86.1 million in FY 2012, and $84.7 million in FY 2013 for a total of nearly $274 million during that three year span."
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/12/30/OPM-274-Million-Paid-to-Dead-Federal-Retirees-Over-Past-3-Years

"The good news is the payment errors to deceased federal retirees have started to go down since the OPM Inspector General (IG) sounded the alarm (https://www.opm.gov/our-inspector-general/legal-and-legislative-affairs/stopping-improper-payments-to-deceased-annuitants.pdf) on the issue in a September 2011 audit."

That's great. At the current rate, they should get it straightened out by the time my grandchildren are retiring. They're actually proud that almost $85,000,000 in 2013 is better than a little more than $86,000,000 in 2011.

I guess it's close enough for government work. But, wait, now they're in charge of healthcare. That will be a wild ride.

[Mainecoons]

Being a Fed is even a nice fat deal even after you're dead. :rofl:

[sachem]

They are still retired when dead.

[Guest]

Being a Fed is even a nice fat deal even after you're dead. :rofl:

In Chicago it's easy to justify paying dead people with taxpayers' money. How else would these people be able to get to the polls in order to vote?

[fyrenza]

i might need to sign my dad up for this ...

The truly sad thing is that you can't believe the MYRIAD hoops you have to jump through,
in order to Set The Records Straight,

and it's only the responsible folks that even bother,

because we OBEY the laws,
and don't want to have to be SUED and/or taken to court ~

we actually value our "reputations,"

AND don't "want" something that isn't really ours.

[Agravan]

Being a Fed is even a nice fat deal even after you're dead. :rofl:
That's because they continue voting Democrat after they die.

[roadmaster]

Why not the US pays for kids that don't exist. At least they did exist at one time.

[Adelaide]

The US really needs to consider having external auditors put into place for these types of institutions - self-policing is redundant and stupid. To be fair, the amount paid out is financially insignificant compared to the federal budget, which isn't to say it isn't important or that it isn't wasteful, but it's not like they accidentally gave out $100 billion. The US government should look at getting external economists and accounting specialists or some kind of ombudsman to audit various agencies and departments to audit what is going on - like within the IRS. Have them sign confidentiality and non-disclosure agreements and send them off to find the inefficiencies and errors.

[Peter1469]

Our Government Accountability Office does that. Additionally, Inspectors General have some audit authority as well. Based on your position, I assume that Canada uses external auditors?

I think the problem is, and this would apply to the GAO or external auditors, that there are just too many government programs to keep tabs on.


The US really needs to consider having external auditors put into place for these types of institutions - self-policing is redundant and stupid. To be fair, the amount paid out is financially insignificant compared to the federal budget, which isn't to say it isn't important or that it isn't wasteful, but it's not like they accidentally gave out $100 billion. The US government should look at getting external economists and accounting specialists or some kind of ombudsman to audit various agencies and departments to audit what is going on - like within the IRS. Have them sign confidentiality and non-disclosure agreements and send them off to find the inefficiencies and errors.

[patrickt]

Our Government Accountability Office does that. Additionally, Inspectors General have some audit authority as well. Based on your position, I assume that Canada uses external auditors?

I think the problem is, and this would apply to the GAO or external auditors, that there are just too many government programs to keep tabs on.

I disagree, Peter. The problem is that fraud, corruption, and incompetence is so widespread and growing so rapidly it's an impossible task. My suggestion, step one, would be to drastically increase the convictions and penalties. Fraud, corruption, and incompetence is endemic from top to bottom.

Consider this message to Inspector Generals in the system from the early days of the current administration:
"WASHINGTON (http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&where1=WASHINGTON&sty=h&form=msdate) — President Barack Obama says he has lost confidence in the inspector general who investigates AmeriCorps and other national service programs and has told Congress he is removing him from the position. Obama's move follows an investigation by IG Gerald Walpin finding misuse of federal grants by a nonprofit education group led by Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson, who is an Obama supporter and former NBA basketball star."
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/31325894/ns/us_news-giving/t/obama-fires-americorps-inspector-general/#.UsLH5meA3hc

The message? You better not find fraud in the wrong places.

[lynn]

The US really needs to consider having external auditors put into place for these types of institutions - self-policing is redundant and stupid. To be fair, the amount paid out is financially insignificant compared to the federal budget, which isn't to say it isn't important or that it isn't wasteful, but it's not like they accidentally gave out $100 billion. The US government should look at getting external economists and accounting specialists or some kind of ombudsman to audit various agencies and departments to audit what is going on - like within the IRS. Have them sign confidentiality and non-disclosure agreements and send them off to find the inefficiencies and errors.

Why would the government do that since this is another way to steal our taxes from us and put it in their pockets.

[lynn]

Our Government Accountability Office does that. Additionally, Inspectors General have some audit authority as well. Based on your position, I assume that Canada uses external auditors?

I think the problem is, and this would apply to the GAO or external auditors, that there are just too many government programs to keep tabs on.

That is not an excuse. Did you know that the military dept has never co-operated with the budget dept in providing them with accurate records of what they are spending our money on? This should never have been tolerated. The government is obligated to provide to the public of where they are spending our money. The problem is they feel they do not have to be honest with the public anymore since what are we going to do about it? NOTHING!

[patrickt]

That is not an excuse. Did you know that the military dept has never co-operated with the budget dept in providing them with accurate records of what they are spending our money on? This should never have been tolerated. The government is obligated to provide to the public of where they are spending our money. The problem is they feel they do not have to be honest with the public anymore since what are we going to do about it? NOTHING!

" Did you know that the military dept has never co-operated with the budget dept in providing them with accurate records of what they are spending our money on?"

Do you have some link for that? I would have thought with news stories about ridiculous expenditures, someone was giving information.

I don't doubt it might be true because I remember recently when criticized for a $4,000,000+ party the IRS said they couldn't say how the money was actually spent because they didn't keep receipts.
http://www.inquisitr.com/689139/irs-cant-find-receipts-for-4-million-conference/
And, we've all heard about the missing $67,000,000 from an Obamacare rollout slush fund.
http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/67-million-missing-from-obamacare-slush-fund/

Do you know the difference between a Mexican politician and an American politician? If you accuse an American politician of being corrupt he is so horribly offended that you should question his honesty. A Mexican politician? He says, "What's your point?"

Remember Bell, California? The corruption runs from very top to the smallest political entities but the smaller ones can at least result in prosecutions and are in some ways manageable. The top is totally out of control. A $4 million party? Mind your own business. A slush fund with $67 million missing? Mind your own business.

[sotmfs]

"The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) erroneously paid $274 million in benefits to deceased federal retirees over the past three years, including $84.7 million in 2013 alone, according to the agency’s annual financial report.

Their job performance was the same as many current federal employees.

[Mini Me]

Who is cashing these checks to dead people? Or are they?

If so, how is this possible?

[Cigar]

"The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) erroneously paid $274 million in benefits to deceased federal retirees over the past three years, including $84.7 million in 2013 alone, according to the agency’s annual financial report.

OPM’s FY 2013 financial report (http://www.opm.gov/about-us/budget-performance/performance/2013-agency-financial-report.pdf?nocache=2) released in mid-December revealed that improper “overpayments” to deceased federal annuitants under its retirement program reached $102.9 million in FY 2011, $86.1 million in FY 2012, and $84.7 million in FY 2013 for a total of nearly $274 million during that three year span."
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/12/30/OPM-274-Million-Paid-to-Dead-Federal-Retirees-Over-Past-3-Years

"The good news is the payment errors to deceased federal retirees have started to go down since the OPM Inspector General (IG) sounded the alarm (https://www.opm.gov/our-inspector-general/legal-and-legislative-affairs/stopping-improper-payments-to-deceased-annuitants.pdf) on the issue in a September 2011 audit."

That's great. At the current rate, they should get it straightened out by the time my grandchildren are retiring. They're actually proud that almost $85,000,000 in 2013 is better than a little more than $86,000,000 in 2011.

I guess it's close enough for government work. But, wait, now they're in charge of healthcare. That will be a wild ride.





Then stop paying them ... :rollseyes:

[sachem]

Who is cashing these checks to dead people? Or are they?

If so, how is this possible?Direct deposit. A wonderful thing.

[Peter1469]

What about the GAO?


I disagree, Peter. The problem is that fraud, corruption, and incompetence is so widespread and growing so rapidly it's an impossible task. My suggestion, step one, would be to drastically increase the convictions and penalties. Fraud, corruption, and incompetence is endemic from top to bottom.

Consider this message to Inspector Generals in the system from the early days of the current administration:
"WASHINGTON (http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&where1=WASHINGTON&sty=h&form=msdate) — President Barack Obama says he has lost confidence in the inspector general who investigates AmeriCorps and other national service programs and has told Congress he is removing him from the position. Obama's move follows an investigation by IG Gerald Walpin finding misuse of federal grants by a nonprofit education group led by Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson, who is an Obama supporter and former NBA basketball star."
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/31325894/ns/us_news-giving/t/obama-fires-americorps-inspector-general/#.UsLH5meA3hc

The message? You better not find fraud in the wrong places.

[Peter1469]

That is not an excuse. Did you know that the military dept has never co-operated with the budget dept in providing them with accurate records of what they are spending our money on? This should never have been tolerated. The government is obligated to provide to the public of where they are spending our money. The problem is they feel they do not have to be honest with the public anymore since what are we going to do about it? NOTHING!

A public sector auditor would have less ability to force the DoD to comply. The GAO is an arm of Congress. If the DoD dicks with the GAO, GAO tells Congress, and Congress can solve the problem very easily by telling DoD, get the needed documents to GAO in one week, for example, or $X of your budget will be axed.

[patrickt]

Who is cashing these checks to dead people? Or are they?

If so, how is this possible?

Checks are so 1980s. It's all direct deposit now. I have a relative on my bank account so they can draw funds immediately when I die, or before if they're so inclined. If I were getting a pension, or SS, but I get neither, they could simply keep it going. Rather like a friend who had to pay his wife alimony, which they now call maintenance, until she remarried. She went to Las Vegas, got married, and she and her new husband lived on the "maintenance" for months before my friend found out.

Life is such a thrill.

[lynn]

"The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) erroneously paid $274 million in benefits to deceased federal retirees over the past three years, including $84.7 million in 2013 alone, according to the agency’s annual financial report.

Their job performance was the same as many current federal employees.


Okay so if they know how much was sent in error then they also know that those people collecting those payments are breaking the law so where are the articles in the media that says they arrested them?

[lynn]

" Did you know that the military dept has never co-operated with the budget dept in providing them with accurate records of what they are spending our money on?"

Do you have some link for that? I would have thought with news stories about ridiculous expenditures, someone was giving information.

I don't doubt it might be true because I remember recently when criticized for a $4,000,000+ party the IRS said they couldn't say how the money was actually spent because they didn't keep receipts.
http://www.inquisitr.com/689139/irs-cant-find-receipts-for-4-million-conference/
And, we've all heard about the missing $67,000,000 from an Obamacare rollout slush fund.
http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/67-million-missing-from-obamacare-slush-fund/

Do you know the difference between a Mexican politician and an American politician? If you accuse an American politician of being corrupt he is so horribly offended that you should question his honesty. A Mexican politician? He says, "What's your point?"

Remember Bell, California? The corruption runs from very top to the smallest political entities but the smaller ones can at least result in prosecutions and are in some ways manageable. The top is totally out of control. A $4 million party? Mind your own business. A slush fund with $67 million missing? Mind your own business.

This doesn't surprise me in the least. You have to remember that the ones at the top are giving hush money in the form of contributions to campaigns so they will ignore the fact they are not conforming to the law.

[lynn]

Direct deposit. A wonderful thing.


A simple solution for the auditor is to have a current copy of all death certificates on hand to stop checks after their death. Surely they have enough employees to tract approximately 4 million deaths per year.

[patrickt]

Those deaths occur in 50 states and some foreign countries. The federal government does not get a list of all deaths. No one does. That might interfere with election fraud and we couldn't have that. I have been told my people on Social Security that periodically they have to appear in person and establish their identity--or the horror of requiring a welfare check ID--or the check is stopped. I believe those living in Mexico have to go see the SS person at the embassy in Mexico City.

When I was working for a city government, once a year we had to show up in person, collect our paycheck, and sign a ledger swearing that we were us. On other paydays a spouse or even a friend could pick up your check for you. I don't know how, or if, they had controls when they went to direct deposit.