May 1, 2007

House Social Security Subcommittee Hearing

This hearing was held to investigate why Social Security had not been hiring more Administrative Law Judges (ALJs). After the hearing, some things are clear:
  • Former Commissioner Barnhart had implied, if not stated explicitly, to the Subcommittee on several occasions that the problem in hiring more ALJs was that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) would not give Social Security an updated register of candidates for ALJ positions. Representative Pomeroy read several statements made by Barnhart to the Subcommittee to this effect.
  • A register was available from which Social Security could hire ALJs. At no point were there ever less than 1,000 names on this register. It was a very old register and not an ideal list to hire from, but it could have been used and was, in fact, used. Astrue admitted that the real problem in hiring ALJs was lack of budget.
  • Former Commissioner Barnhart misled the Subcommittee. The ALJ register was never the reason for not hiring more ALJs. Budget was the reason.
  • OPM gets the picture now that a new ALJ register is urgently needed and expects to have one by this fall. Social Security does not expect to hire more ALJs until the beginning of the new fiscal year on October 1, so the ALJ register should be no hindrance to hiring ALJs. The Subcommittee sent a strong message to OPM that they better have that new register ready on time or there will be hell to pay.
Beyond that, Commissioner Astrue talked about his plans for reducing Social Security's hearing backlog. He had little to announce. Beyond what is contained in the written statement that I have already linked, Astrue was talking about hiring 150 more ALJs in the next fiscal year and a total of 750-850 full time equivalents (FTEs) to help out with the backlog. Currently, there are 1,082 Social Security ALJs available to hold hearings. This would mean about a 15% increase in ALJs employed. Astrue pleaded that he could not hire more without creating problems in training and absorbing the additional ALJs.

Astrue made it clear that he wants to have some percentage of the new ALJs assigned to the Office of Disability Adjudication and Review (ODAR) central office in Falls Church to hold video hearings to help out with backlogs. He wants to explore moving more ALJs to Falls Church.

The Commissioner has some plans that are pending review at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) that he was unwilling to share with the Subcommittee.

Astrue wants to hold the line on the hearing backlog this year and work on the backlog next year.

Commissioner Astrue has been lobbying hard to get more budget for his agency. He had already met with three members of the Appropriations Committee and was planning to meet with another this afternoon. He said he was exhausted.

Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jones is a demanding and sharp tongued questioner. Commissioner Astrue is unused to dealing with such a person.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

I didn't hear Astrue say that the budget was always the reason for not hiring-Just the reason in FY06.

I did notice that he mentioned something about "pending" litigation possibly interfering with future hiring. However, there was no follow up on that point by the Subcommittee. So it's unclear what litigation Astrue was referring to.

Anonymous said...

Director Springer's written statement referenced an attachment that apparently reflected a timeline for the new alj register. It is not posted on the Social Security Subcommittee website - were specific dates discussed?