Last year I made a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the Social Security Administration for all the recent Emergency Messages that the agency has been withholding from public view on the grounds that they are too "sensitive" to be released. I have finally received a partial response to my request. 121 pages of records were released to me. Another 68 pages are still being withheld.
I am of the opinion that as a result of a recent order from President Obama and a recent Memorandum from the Attorney General that the agency has no basis for withholding these records from me. I have filed an appeal.
I am not going to try to post the entire 121 pages I have received. Most are truly trivial. If you want them, please let me know and I can e-mail the whole thing to you.
I have posted five of the more interesting ones on the separate Social Security Perspectives blog.
I am of the opinion that as a result of a recent order from President Obama and a recent Memorandum from the Attorney General that the agency has no basis for withholding these records from me. I have filed an appeal.
I am not going to try to post the entire 121 pages I have received. Most are truly trivial. If you want them, please let me know and I can e-mail the whole thing to you.
I have posted five of the more interesting ones on the separate Social Security Perspectives blog.
- EM-07084 contains instructions for implementing "Informal Remands", also known as "re-recons." Because of its length and Blogger's limitations, this is broken up into Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3. I think that any reasonable person familiar with the subject will agree that this should have been released to the public. As an attorney who represents Social Security claimants I should have had access to this. Ironically, the "Informal Remands" are now about to end just as we finally find out how they are being implemented.
- EM-08081 shows that several large Long Term Disability (LTD) companies have entered into an agreement to provide the Social Security Administration with medical records on their insureds.
- EM-08087 shows how the Social Security Administration is administering the HEART Act which provides for special treatment of certain veterans annuities, special pay and allowances to military service members and AmeriCorps payments. It is clearly a policy document that should have been released to the public.
- EM-08093 is a great example of the absurdity of Social Security's treatment of these Emergency Messages. This "sensitive" document shows how Social Security was working with the Postal Service and the Department of the Treasury to move up the delivery date of checks in advance of Hurricane Ike in September 2008. I have no idea why Social Security would want to keep this secret. The absurdity did not end in 2008. Take a look at the document. Social Security has redacted the portion of the document showing the zip codes affected. The only explanation is "Ex. 2." This refers to the Exception 2 in the FOIA which allows agencies to withhold materials "related solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of an agency." I do not think those who received their checks early thought that this matter related only to the agency. Even if one can imagine a twisted justification under FOIA for this redaction, what is the point? The recent order from President Obama specifically directs agencies that their should be a "clear presumption" for release of records. The Attorney General's memorandum warns agencies that the Department of Justice will defend FOIA cases only if some interest protected by the FOIA would be harmed by the disclosure. What is there to even think about here?
- EM-08105, which is broken down into Part 1 and Part 2 due to its length, contains information about how Social Security is interpreting and applying the SSI Extension for Elderly and Disabled Refugees Act. It seems obvious to me that this policy material should be freely available to the public.
1 comment:
Well, no words. This stuff is innocuous and should have been published. The re-recons should have been published, because once you know that, a good CR or OS will jump in and get it started. I used to send back any case I saw that just looked wrong. Plenty of 'em too. I got those cases allowed more likely than not, and often just in time. Some of the claimants involved died after receiving on a few checks. There's no rule against it. But, I was a little obssessed. I'm glad we get a chance to see this stuff. Helps form a notion of the state of the agency, and boy, it ain't good.
Post a Comment