Social Security's Office of Inspector General (OIG) has done a study on the costs of continuining disability benefits to SSI recipients as they appeal decisions that would cut off their benefits. OIG estimates that the costs of doing so were $199.5 million over a two year period.
A few questions come to mind in reading this study. Why was the OIG doing a study of this to begin with? Congress made a value judgment that the fair thing to do for the desperately poor people who receive SSI was to not cut off their monthly checks until the appeal process was finished. Is the Inspector General producing the report in an effort to get the statute changed? What is the purpose of the report otherwise? Is this an appropriate use of OIG funds? OIG attempted to add a little something to suggest that there is some issue other than the statute by saying that the overpayments would not have been as great if SSA could process these cases more quickly. That is true, but there is no mention in the report of the terrible staffing shortages at SSA that delay everything the agency does, including SSI terminations. Although OIG constantly criticizes delays and mistakes at SSA, there is never a mention in OIG reports of the severe constraints imposed upon SSA because its staff has been cut dramatically over the last twenty-five years while SSA's workload has increased dramatically. Perhaps SSA's staffing shortages are not so apparent at OIG, which seems to be flush with money and personnel.
A few questions come to mind in reading this study. Why was the OIG doing a study of this to begin with? Congress made a value judgment that the fair thing to do for the desperately poor people who receive SSI was to not cut off their monthly checks until the appeal process was finished. Is the Inspector General producing the report in an effort to get the statute changed? What is the purpose of the report otherwise? Is this an appropriate use of OIG funds? OIG attempted to add a little something to suggest that there is some issue other than the statute by saying that the overpayments would not have been as great if SSA could process these cases more quickly. That is true, but there is no mention in the report of the terrible staffing shortages at SSA that delay everything the agency does, including SSI terminations. Although OIG constantly criticizes delays and mistakes at SSA, there is never a mention in OIG reports of the severe constraints imposed upon SSA because its staff has been cut dramatically over the last twenty-five years while SSA's workload has increased dramatically. Perhaps SSA's staffing shortages are not so apparent at OIG, which seems to be flush with money and personnel.
No comments:
Post a Comment