Like Causes?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 2792

Should Fugitives With Outstanding Warrants for Felonies Not Get Social Security Benefits?

Argument in favor

A wanted felon on the run from the law shouldn’t be receiving a government-issued check each month with Social Security disability or retirement benefits, it’s commonsense.

Pamela's Opinion
···
09/26/2017
While I concur with "innocent until proven guilty", we must keep in mind these are FUGITIVES with outstanding warrants. They are dodging their date with justice. If denying access to their benefits compels them to come in and have their day in court, I believe the end justifies the means. Innocent persons would not be on the lam.
Like (93)
Follow
Share
Leon's Opinion
···
09/28/2017
Why are we paying fugitives or convicted criminals?
Like (20)
Follow
Share
operaman's Opinion
···
09/26/2017
Certainly going in the right direction. What about collecting all cost involved in catching the felon by taking his monthly allotment. Since Court costs are so high and incarceration costs a fortune, the felon may never see a dime. Pay back can be a bitch and taxpayers have relief.
Like (18)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

Fugitive felons shouldn't receive Social Security benefits but there are already ways to prevent that, and the bill would deny benefits to people who haven't been convicted.

singinghawk926's Opinion
···
09/26/2017
Excuse me, but do we not recall that in THIS nation, this “land of the free and home of the brave”, a person is INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty? And just which of We the People will this stupid idea for a law harm? You guessed it: the ones with the least money! This cannot be called an improvement over the current situation, and I am DONE, DONE, DONE with the attempts by the Party charged with putting on the breaks of our democracy to bring our entire Democracy to a grinding halt! Social security benefits are paid to those of We the People who WORKED and paid into the system, as well as to those who, for reasons that are documented BEFORE they receive benefits,are deemed to be unable to work for many different reasons. Legislators who proposed and support this bill need to get educated about how this democratic republic is supposed to work!
Like (140)
Follow
Share
Keith's Opinion
···
09/26/2017
So they know that a person is a felon with outstanding warrants, where that person lives, and we’re worried about the felon getting benefits? Shouldn’t we be more concerned that law enforcement isn’t arresting a known felon with outstanding warrants?
Like (70)
Follow
Share
Randy's Opinion
···
09/23/2017
If you paid into social security, that is your money. Outstanding warrants for a felony or any offense is a separate issue. I feel this is just another way for our government to try and keep something that belongs to the people.
Like (62)
Follow
Share
    While I concur with "innocent until proven guilty", we must keep in mind these are FUGITIVES with outstanding warrants. They are dodging their date with justice. If denying access to their benefits compels them to come in and have their day in court, I believe the end justifies the means. Innocent persons would not be on the lam.
    Like (93)
    Follow
    Share
    Excuse me, but do we not recall that in THIS nation, this “land of the free and home of the brave”, a person is INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty? And just which of We the People will this stupid idea for a law harm? You guessed it: the ones with the least money! This cannot be called an improvement over the current situation, and I am DONE, DONE, DONE with the attempts by the Party charged with putting on the breaks of our democracy to bring our entire Democracy to a grinding halt! Social security benefits are paid to those of We the People who WORKED and paid into the system, as well as to those who, for reasons that are documented BEFORE they receive benefits,are deemed to be unable to work for many different reasons. Legislators who proposed and support this bill need to get educated about how this democratic republic is supposed to work!
    Like (140)
    Follow
    Share
    I'm confused. If they are fugitives, how would they even get the money? If the government can find them to pay them SS benefits, can't they find them & arrest them? Please explain.
    Like (113)
    Follow
    Share
    So they know that a person is a felon with outstanding warrants, where that person lives, and we’re worried about the felon getting benefits? Shouldn’t we be more concerned that law enforcement isn’t arresting a known felon with outstanding warrants?
    Like (70)
    Follow
    Share
    If you paid into social security, that is your money. Outstanding warrants for a felony or any offense is a separate issue. I feel this is just another way for our government to try and keep something that belongs to the people.
    Like (62)
    Follow
    Share
    How about denying SS for the 1% instead?
    Like (39)
    Follow
    Share
    This does not follow due process. And the idea is to starve them out? Gee, that won't lead to more crime and homelessness at all.
    Like (30)
    Follow
    Share
    Why are we paying fugitives or convicted criminals?
    Like (20)
    Follow
    Share
    Outstanding warrants for felonies most often means melanin--in other words, living while black or any other "color." If the White House and Cabinet's hundreds of thousands of dollar private jets jaunts were applied to the Social Security fund --from which money was withdrawn year after year for purposes of Washington, not the people who paid into the fund--those millions could easily be given to people who are theoretically innocent until proven guilty. As said by a wise woman, the 1% are considered innocent after being proven guilty repeatedly. Why not those who need Social Security?
    Like (19)
    Follow
    Share
    Certainly going in the right direction. What about collecting all cost involved in catching the felon by taking his monthly allotment. Since Court costs are so high and incarceration costs a fortune, the felon may never see a dime. Pay back can be a bitch and taxpayers have relief.
    Like (18)
    Follow
    Share
    They earned that money by having gainful employment. It would be wrong to withhold benefits that are rightfully owed to them.
    Like (18)
    Follow
    Share
    If you paid into social security, that is your money. Outstanding warrants for a felony or any offense is a separate issue. I feel this is just another way for our government to try and keep something that belongs to the people.
    Like (15)
    Follow
    Share
    Ahhh, if only the Republicans were equally as forgiving and supportive of these "innocent-until-proven-guilty" as they were of their fellow 1%ers, corporate lobbyists, donor corporations and financial institutions, colleagues in the House, law enforcement organizations, etc. If only...
    Like (13)
    Follow
    Share
    This is unconstitutional and a violation of the due process of law as a punishment without a conviction. Innocent until proven guilty, remember?
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    I think you should vote against this bill. I have worked for CMS and seen how easy it is for someone's Medicare to get cutoff for the rest of their life because the processes were design poorly. For example the code for date of death and date of delivery were 02 and 20. It was nearly impossible for someone to get their benefits reinstated when the system counted them as deceased. I know this kind of process will end up having more externalities, more paperwork, more ruined lives and will end up costing taxpayers even more than social security costs us. Invest in the root cause of the system, education, clean water and healthy food in all neighborhoods, safe streets, and more importantly affordable housing and you will stamp out most petty crime. Focus on root problems not symptoms. As a taxpayer I cannot continue to fund band aids forever. I'd rather move to a European country.
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill allows governments to label an undesirable with a warrant and impoverish them. Sounds very Sheriff of Nottingham to me.
    Like (8)
    Follow
    Share
    what ever happened to Innoccent to proven guilty
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    Seems reasonable to discourage violation of terms of parole/probation. Due process is over; they're convicted felons already. But what is the $2.1B cost over 10 years? Just freeze payments until they're back in compliance with the law... how does that cost $200M/yr?
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    Now the dems come out with the "innocent until proven guilty argument". Blatant hypocrisy.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    If someone has not been convicted their benefits should not be cut off. There may be a family dependent on the money.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE