CB>If you find out the percentage, why not share it with the rest of us?
  >And if you are able to coerce the "powers in charge" into dropping the
  >federal funding, please let us know what services the district will
  >eliminate in order to compensate for the loss of revenue.
Finding out the percentage is not all that hard I hope, convincing the
managers to drop it would be the battle.  Money is power, and power is
the name of the game in this system at least.
CB>I'm sure that you understood that I was not advocating that people
  >cheat, only that it was easier for people to get on the free lunch
  >program because income limits were published in advance and because
  >districts were not required to hire people to verify free lunch
  >applications against income tax records.  But in response to your claim
  >above, which is cheating the truly needy really more - spending $50,000
  >a year on administration of the program in a county or giving away
  >$15,000 in meals to people who don't really qualify?  I think it poses
  >an interesting dilemma.
I realize your not advocating that the cheating is OK.  However that
takes us back to the reality that tolerance promotes a given behavior.
The students cheating very likely know that they are cheating the system
and they get away with it.  It begins a cycle that is continuous and
escalating.
CB>I think we're getting dangerously close to arguing politics here, not
  >educational issues, so I'll make this brief.  I can't think of a program
  >run by public sector agencies or private sector businesses that runs
  >flawlessly, and that includes the free lunch program run by schools and
  >largely funded by the federal government.  I don't believe anyone
  >running such a program could satisfy every critic's demand that only the
  >*truly needy* (is there just one definition of truly needy?) be served.
I would think ethics more than politics.  The education system should
promote ethical behavior and allowing individuals to cheat the system
IMO does not follow that line of reasoning.  In the US we seem to equate
X number dollars to the term needy.  This is true in the free lunch
program also and remember this was just a provable example of waste and
fraud in the education system.  It could also be applied to educating
illegal immigrants.  Everyone knows it goes on and that it takes tax
dollars from legitimate citizens, yet by tolerance the behavior is
further encouraged.  A few million here and there until it is
finally realized  the cost is too great.
  >TC>My guess would be closer to 25 % in this area. That too is just a 
uess.
  >TC>I would opt for a simpler solution than doing a study.  Tie the free
  >TC>lunch to the child's social security number and pump it into the IRS's
  >TC>computer as income.  The truly poor will not be flagged. The thieves in
  >TC>the system could be flagged and required to reimburse the system.
CB>Interesting idea.  I'm not sure of it's feasibility, but it is a
  >suggestion that might be worth looking into.  Now, if only all of the
  >people who lie on their free lunch application will just report all
  >income (even cash) on their 1040's, we'll have the problem knocked. ;-)
Now why did you have to bring us back to reality :)
___
 X QMPro 1.53 X a (uA4+o++WJ!u2M  j!O+!h <++o |+iLA :+oN .2oc_  oUaB)++iEe
--- Maximus 2.02
---------------