Michigan Governor Rick Snyder's MIDAS program had a 93% error rate and falsely accused 20,000 workers of unemployment fraud


Originally published at: http://boingboing.net/2016/12/18/michigan-governor-rick-snyder.html


Well nobody’s perfect!


See, this is the problem with many so-called “fiscal conservatives”. Their penny pinching actually costs money in the long run.

In this case, the fruad prevention system cost the state far more in operating expenses than it recovered.


So let’s get this straight: conservative government institutes a blatantly fraudulent system to gather monies from the populace, uses said money to “balance” their yearly budget; a budget that relied upon said government to stay functional in the first place.

Sounds like typical conservative governance to me.


Not to mention the loss of the money that the poor people would have spent in local economies that instead would go to lawyers who can afford to buy foreign cars and vacation in other countries. The long term effects are even worse than just the operating cost itself. Poor people who might have gotten back on their feet through assistance are still poor and likely not paying much, if any, tax revenue to the state.


Or if you prefer,


Perhaps if they increase the error rate, it could definitively wrong?


93% error rate

Apply that to the entire TGOP. I was thinking it was a little low though…


I guess that the only reason anyone lives in Michigan is because they are too poor or sick to escape.


I guess Snyder didn’t want to be remembered only as the guy who poisoned Flint.


If anyone could go higher than 100%, it will be the TGOP and Drumpf


And, y’know, doctors without borders on “vacation” to lovely michigan.


Which campaign contributor(s) benefited from this? I ask because at the heart of every “fiscally conservative” idea there’s someone making a profit.


I think the answer to your question of who benefits is the company came up with this crappy auditing software. I assume some Snyder crony got the contract for the project and they developed the cheapest thing possible while pocketing the rest. Hence the results.


An investigation finds fully 7% were fraudulent!


And the money saved can be used to build more prisons!

See, it all works out in the end!


How can that error rate be possible. We’re talking beyond gross negligence and into malicious malfeasance to actively get results that shitty, right?


Would you trust something whose snappy acronym was (apparently deliberately) inspired by the mythological character best known for destroying his own life and placing those around him in great peril through rapacious avarice? And would you trust someone who would deliberately brand an unemployment-related program that way?


I have this sneaking suspicion that the spirit of the program was that 100% of unemployment-seekers were worthless parasitic scum; so any false positives that didn’t spiral into litigation or cause the program to get shut down weren’t errors; just ‘justice’ that happened to lack a little irrelevant supporting documentation.


So I guess this’ll teach poor folks not to vote Republican.

Ha. I wish…