ShareThis Page
Federal charges |

Federal charges

| Tuesday, August 28, 2001 12:00 a.m

I am writing in response to the article and editorials that have appeared in the Tribune-Review regarding the federal government’s use of credit cards. I was stunned, but not totally surprised.

This is just another example of a government program that has gotten completely out of control. It was originated to streamline employee purchases, but it has evolved into an apparent gravy train wracked with abuse. In typical government fashion, there are no checks and balances to accurately monitor expenditures. That seemingly would be asking too much, considering the fact that the government can’t seem to figure out how many cards to issue.

It was reported that some departments have more credit cards than employees. It was also reported that several banks have had to write off tens of millions of dollars in bad debt because of this program. I’m sure the banks recouped some of their losses by way of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. So that means the taxpayers are getting duped twice. First, tax dollars are funding the fraudulent purchases. Second, tax dollars are funding the FDIC payouts.

Going even further, I don’t think it’s a stretch to think that this program does anything to keep credit card interest rates at a reasonable level.

To pay off the bad debt, maybe the federal government should do an audit of all the expenditures and garnish wages of employees who abused the system.

Patrick Wolff
North Huntingdon Township

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.