http://www.pakalertpress.com/2012/11/26/use-of-rfid-tracking-technology-to-be-mandatory-in-us-food-stamp-program-2/
Use of RFID Tracking Technology To Be Mandatory In US Food Stamp Program
November 26, 2012 1
Food stamp welfare individuals must soon be chipped
“And he causeth all, both small and
great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right
hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he
that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.”
(Revelation 13:16-17)
In a little while, the above scene in Revelation 13 will become a global reality. People can no longer buy or sell without the mark of the beast. And sometimes that would mean no longer being able to eat!
The USDA is now considering biometric
identification for all individuals who will want to benefit from their
Food and Nutrition Services. The RFID chip may just soon be a must for
everyone who does not want to starve!
The following is an excerpt of the executive summary of the FINAL REPORT of the Use of Biometric Identification Technology to Reduce Fraud in the Food Stamp Program:
Biometric identification technology
provides automated methods to identify a person based on physical
characteristics—such as fingerprints, hand shape, and characteristics of
the eyes and face—as well as behavioral characteristics—including
signatures and voice patterns.
Although
used in law enforcement and defense for several years, it has recently
been used in civilian applications and shows some promise to reduce the
number of duplicate cases in the Food Stamp Program (FSP) and other assistance programs .
Already operational in some states
Biometric identification systems are currently operational at some level
in Arizona, California (under county initiative, first by Los Angeles
County), Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and
Texas. Finger imaging is the principal form of technology used in all
eight States, though alternative technologies have simultaneously
undergone trials in Massachusetts (facial recognition)
and Illinois (retinal scanning). By the end of 2000, new systems are
expected to be in place in California (statewide unified system),
Delaware, and North Carolina. Other States are currently in the initial
planning stages, including Florida, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi,
Pennsylvania, and South Carolina. However, there is little information
available at this point regarding the specific course and trajectory
these States will follow in terms of system types, implementation
schedules, and the benefit programs in which they will implement the new
requirement.
The States planned for implementation of
their biometric identification systems in response to a wide variety of
factors and considerations idiosyncratic to each State environment.
Some States reported that their respective legislative mandates, which
prescribed specific dates by which biometric systems
were required to be in place, allowed insufficient time for development
and planning. The States developed and followed implementation
schedules in accordance with internal priorities and considerations. The
States uniformly described their implementation processes as largely
uneventful, though they encountered a variety of minor implementation
issues, most of which were associated with the logistical difficulties
of mobilizing and managing such a complex initiative.
Preparing staff for the implementation of the biometric systems,
both philosophically and operationally, took different forms,
priorities, and levels of effort in the States. At implementation,
advance notification to clients and/or the general public about new
biometric client identification procedures was considered important by
all State representatives. The objective of providing advance
notification was to inform and prepare clients for the additional
application or recertification step (i.e., to explain the requirement
and who is required to submit, and to address client concerns), as well
as to accelerate enrollment of the existing caseload. All States
prepared informational mailings to clients advising them of the new
requirement. Some States reported developing additional outreach media
including multilingual (English and Spanish) videos,
posters, and brochures for viewing and distribution in the local
office. Most of the States also identified various outlets in the
community through which they informed the general public in advance
about the implementation of biometric client identification procedures.
Program outcomes
The evaluations of finger imaging systems conducted by six States have produced the following findings.
- A small number of duplicate applications (approximately 1 duplicate for every 5,000 cases) have been detected by finger imaging systems. Finger-imaging systems appear to detect more fraud in statewide implementations than in regional pilot systems. Additional matches have been found by interstate comparisons of finger-image data.
- Institution of a finger-imaging requirement can produce a significant, short-term reduction in caseload, because some existing clients refuse to comply with the requirement. The number of refusals depends on the implementation procedures and appears to be lower when finger imaging is incorporated into the recertification process.
- The most carefully controlled estimate of non-compliance among existing clients suggests that introduction of a finger-imaging requirement reduces participation by approximately 1.3%. However, this estimate reflects both reduced fraud and deterrence of eligible individuals and households.
Source – USDA
No comments:
Post a Comment