There’s a red hot dispute raging in the free government cell phone industry and we clearly come down on the side of those who want to ban in-person sign-ups.
We have a pretty formidable ally in this battle, because TracFone, the largest company in the business with their Safelink Wireless presence, also wants the FCC to outlaw in-person sign-ups and deliveries.
No one — absolutely no one — supports the free government cell phone program more than we do. But we have also long editorialized against the rampant fraud that plagues the program. While some want to kill the program completely, we argue instead that cracking down on fraud will save the program.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has done an outstanding job of cleaning up the program, reducing waste, and cutting back on fraud. With that in mind, we fully support TracFone’s efforts to get the FCC to change the way the cell phones are delivered.
Here’s how politico.com frames the current argument:
“TracFone, the program’s largest participant, wants the Federal Communications Commission to ban the in-person sale of phones. It has found backing from consumer groups who view the move as an opportune way to temper recent congressional flare-ups and quell persisting concerns of misuse. But competing carriers and some rights organizations view the move as an unnecessary stunt that could endanger a service for the poor.”
TracFone believes the United States Postal Service is the best way to deliver the phones to new enrollees and says banning in-person distribution will dramatically curb fraud and abuse. They believe that distribution via street markets and home visits facilitates fraud and abuse that threaten to kill the free government cell phone program.
We agree with them completely.
politico.com quotes John Breyault, National Consumers League Vice President of Public Policy, as saying, “This is sort of the low-hanging fruit. It’s an important first step we can take now.”
Unfortunately, other supporters of the free government cell phone program say TracFone is merely trying to protect its own turf.
A group called Lifeline Reform 2.0 Coalition also wants reforms, but disagrees with TracFone’s approach. According to politico.com, the group wants “more scrutiny during the enrollment process, enhanced audits and mandatory access to customer service representatives.”
In other words, everyone agrees that the free government cell phone program needs to be cleaned up, but no one agrees on how.
Our position: As long as people can be approached on the street and talked into taking a phone, the kind of reforms TracFone proposes are the best way to clean up the industry.
Please let us know if there’s anything we can do to support your efforts, TracFone.
Source: Politico
Sharon says
I’m a Safelink Representative and work outdoors to sign qualified people for a free phone. To get this job I had to comply with a background check and drug test. I don’t have a criminal record, therefore, I know I’m not committing fraud by repeatedly signing up people who don’t qualify for program. One way to combat fraud, Safelink should make sure the enrollment application Agents are trained to use enables us to check thoroughly the applicant’s benefits card is valid and then submit application to be process to administrative office to process and ship phone to applicant. Doing it this way will stop pending and rejected applications.
Free Government Cell Phones says
Everything you say may be true, Sharon, but there have been so many problems with the street agents that we strongly urge our readers to enroll online or by phone.
Fred Garvin says
How repellant. If someone is handed a phone on the street it’s because they’re “qualified” to receive it. Instead of betting ON the program and AGAINST it simultaneously, put those resources toward lobbying congress to keep this vital program open and easy to access. Maybe look towards Wall Street if you’re hell-bent on chasing down fraud.
Free Government Cell Phones says
You’ve misinterpreted our comments against fraud, Fred. In the case of street tents and booths, we’re concerned about fraud on the part of the customers. We’re concerned about fraud and abuse on the part of the people working at the tents and booths. There have been too many cases of identity theft and signing up of people without adequately checking their qualifications. For every person who gets a cell phone via this fraud, someone who really deserves the phones is shut out. There’s only so much money to go around and we want it directly to those who really deserve it.
LAUREL GENEVIEVE says
I heard from an ASSURANCE WIRELESS rep today that BUDGET MOBILE is no longer allowed to operate in California any longer.
Is this true?
What is the word on ASSURANCE WIRELESS? Are they trustworthy and legit?
Can anyone give me any feedback or answers on my questions?
FreeGovernmentCellPhones.net says
Yes, Assurance Wireless is trustworthy and one of the biggest providers. As for Budget, we just looked at their home page and it was advertising that they are available in California.
Charles c smith says
I work for Budget Mobile I transferred from Arizona to California and my boss told me that Budget Mobile cannot operate in California.
Free Government Cell Phones says
You’ve been given some inaccurate information, Charles. Budget does offer free government cell phones in California and even has a special “California Lifeline” page on its website.
patrice moynihan says
Aloha, still waiting for Hawaii to engage in the program. Any news on that story?
Mahalo
gerard gaudin says
It really amazes me that there seems to be so much Fraud in the Free Phone Service. I have one because I “Qualified” for it; and believe me, after dealing with Customer Service at Assurance it’s a miracle that I ever received one!!! They speak Perfect English but don’t understand a word of it!!! Be that as it may: they Really Check all the stuff that you have to send for the Qualification; and, at the end of a year you have to Jump thru hoops again to re-qualify. The bottom line is, that I only use my Free Phone for Extremely Basic Use; yet still run out of minutes in a month due to them deducting minutes for anything that is either ‘incoming’ or ‘outgoing’. Thus I find it difficult to imagine any kind of fraud on the user side of the equation. However, I do support putting an end to any illegal use of the Free Phone program; because my phone is extremely important and essential to me.