Front Page
NMJ Search
International
Islamofascism
Government & Politics
National & Local
Progressivism
Culture Wars
Editorials
Commentary
Archive
NMJ Radio
Constitutional Literacy
Islamofascism
Progressivism
Books
NMJ Shop
Links, Etc...
Facebook
Twitter
Site Information
About Us
Contact Us
  US Senate
  US House
  Anti-Google




The IG extrapolated with 95% certainty that between 1,111 and 2,433 loans totaling between $124.3 million and $292.3 were made to ineligible borrowers or projects.
Social Bookmarking
Print this page.
Ineligible Borrowers Got Hundreds
of Millions in Stimulus Money

The Heritage Foundation
The Agriculture Department’s Rural Housing Service likely loaned hundreds of millions of dollars to ineligible borrowers as part of President Obama’s stimulus package, a report by federal watchdogs has revealed.

The stimulus earmarked more than $1 billion for RHS home loans in rural communities. According to the Ag Department’s Inspector General, up to $292.3 million of those loans may have financed ineligible projects, or gone to borrowers that did not meet the loan program’s requirements due to their potential inability to repay the loans.

The IG examined a sample of 100 RHS stimulus loans, and found that 17 had been extended to borrowers who “(1) had no history of stable and dependable income, (2) had a credit history that did not indicate the ability and willingness to repay a loan, or (3) did not meet repayment ability guidelines.”

Six loans in the report’s sample financed properties that did not meet the program’s eligibility requirements. Some “lacked sufficient documentation that the homes were decent, safe, and sanitary,” according to the report.

The IG extrapolated with 95% certainty that between 1,111 and 2,433 loans totaling between $124.3 million and $292.3 were made to ineligible borrowers or projects. The report faulted RHS personnel for the oversight.

"Rural Development field-level personnel made these questionable determinations because they were not sufficiently trained on how to either conduct or adequately document proper determinations; did not have an effective second party review process in place to catch errors; and did not have sufficient guidance on the characteristics and requirements needed for a property to become eligible. Rural Development conducted a follow-up review of the questionable loans and agreed that they were not fully processed in accordance with regulations or handbook requirements."

READ FULL SOURCE ARTICLE

Editor's Note: Oh yeah...we can trust the federal government to run the health insurance industry...Quizzle me this, Batman, what program does the federal government administer that is not rife with fraud, overchanrges and bloated spending? Answer: Not one.


The BasicsProject.org informational and educational pamphlet series is now available for Kindle and iPad. Click here to find out more...


The BasicsProject.org informational and educational pamphlet series is now available for Kindle and iPad. Click here to find out more...

The New Media Journal and BasicsProject.org are not funded by outside sources. We exist exclusively on tax deductible donations from our readers and contributors.
Please make a tax deductible donation today.







Opinions expressed by contributing writers are expressly their own and may or may not represent the opinions of The New Media Journal, BasicsProject.org, its editorial staff, board or organization.  Reprint inquiries should be directed to the author of the article. Contact the editor for a link request to The New Media Journal.  The New Media Journal is not affiliated with any mainstream media organizations.  The New Media Journal is not supported by any political organization. The New Media Journal is a division of BasicsProject.org, a non-profit, non-partisan 501(c)(3) research and educational initiative.  Responsibility for the accuracy of cited content is expressly that of the contributing author. All original content offered by The New Media Journal and BasicsProject.org is copyrighted. Basics Project's goal is the liberation of the American voter from partisan politics and special interests in government through the primary-source, fact-based education of the American people.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance a more in-depth understanding of critical issues facing the world. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 USC Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.


The Media Journal.us © 1998-2013    Content Copyright © Individual authors
A Division of BasicsProject.org
Powered by ExpressionEngine 1.70 and M3Server