Fingerprinting Voted to Cut Welfare Fraud

Over objections that some poor people will opt for the streets rather than be fingerprinted for a hotel room, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted Tuesday to require photographs and fingerprints of general relief applicants who fail to produce acceptable identification.

Voting 3 to 1 along conservative-liberal lines, the supervisors approved the controversial anti-fraud measure that welfare officials contend will discourage applicants from collecting more than one emergency housing voucher by faking different identities.

The new measures were sought by the county welfare director, Eddy S. Tanaka, who said that in the last two years, “We have experienced a dramatic growth in the number of applicants who have indicated they have no identification.” Many of these people are “office hopping” within the welfare system to obtain more benefits than they are entitled to, Tanaka said. General relief consists of lodging and food benefits worth $228 per month per person.

Supervisor Ed Edelman opposed the new procedure, arguing unsuccessfully that the fingerprinting will scare off eligible needy people--primarily the homeless mentally ill. But Tanaka said anyone applying for a voucher who shows signs of mental illness will be referred to mental health caseworkers and not be required to submit to being fingerprinted or photographed.

The ordinance language adopted Tuesday, however, does not exclude the homeless mentally ill. Technically, anyone applying for general relief can be subjected to fingerprinting and photographing before receiving assistance.

Tanaka told reporters, however, that he has targeted for fingerprinting only those applicants lacking acceptable identification such as a driver’s license, state identification card or a Social Security number. While acknowledging that the board authorized fingerprinting and photographing of all general relief applicants, Tanaka said he will broaden the controversial activity only if specifically ordered by the board.

Lack Required Identification

More than 1,200 of the approximately 8,000 people who apply for general relief each month lack identification normally required by welfare officials for emergency aid, Tanaka said. Since December, 1983, the county has been barred from denying aid based solely on a person’s inability to prove identity. That court order, however, is set to expire in June.

Investigators have foiled about 200 fraud attempts in the last year, Tanaka said, stopping acts that could have cost the county more than $3.5 million. He added that the fingerprinting and photographing system, which eventually may become computerized, will improve the fraud detection capability, although he could not predict whether any added savings will result.

Development of the new procedures was ordered late last year after disclosures that some individuals were obtaining multiple vouchers under different identities and then selling them to homeless people ignorant of their right to obtain free emergency help. The vouchers, redeemable at a number of inexpensive hotels, range in value from $8 to $16 a day.

Edelman, contending that “obviously if there is fraud, it ought to be wiped out,” nevertheless expressed doubt that fingerprinting will be effective in curbing fraud. He branded the new procedure a “barrier to general relief” at a time “when we’re trying to reduce the number of homeless on the streets.”

It was not clear how the homeless might react to the new requirements, effective sometime next month. But about 30 supporters of the homeless, who have been protesting for weeks what they perceive to be the small size of general relief grants, added the fingerprinting procedure to their list of complaints during a brief round of chanting at Tuesday’s board meeting.

Some advocates for the homeless have expressed mixed sentiments about the fingerprinting. They concede that it might help eliminate fraud but say they share Edelman’s concern about the effect on the homeless mentally ill.

Members of the board’s conservative majority, meanwhile, were unanimous in their belief that the new procedures were necessary.

“This has nothing to do with the homeless who are receiving their $228 a month (general relief checks),” Supervisor Deane Dana said. “What we’re talking about is people who are ripping us off. They’re stealing from Los Angeles County.”

Board Chairman Pete Schabarum scoffed at Edelman’s concern that the new procedure will discourage applicants.

“You characterize fingerprinting as a bugaboo,” Schabarum told Edelman. “There are an awful lot of activities (for which) Joe and Jane Common Citizen around here are required to give their fingerprints--not the least of which is seeking a job--which seems to me ought to be a relevant consideration.

“I’ve always supported the idea that we’ve got to do our share and, certainly, when those people who are truly in need should be taken care of, we ought to do so. This (fingerprinting) is an acceptable course of action.”