Feb 14, 2011

President's Budget

The President's recommended budget for Social Security for Fiscal Year (FY) 2012, which begins on October 1, 2011, is out. It recommends $12.496 billion for Social Security, a 2% increase from the President's recommended budget for FY 2011 although that is a somewhat theoretical number since it will never be enacted, and a 9% increase over the FY 2010 budget. Social Security is currently operating under a Continuing Resolution (CR) which allows the agency to spend money at the FY 2010 rate. This would amount to a nice jump for Social Security if it could be enacted.

The budget proposal says that the President "proposes a new Disability Insurance Work Incentives Simplification Pilot (WISP) to provide beneficiaries a simpler set of work rules that no longer terminates benefits based solely on earnings." I have no idea whether this is simply a new name for the Benefits Offset National Demonstration (BOND) experiment that has just started. If it is the same thing, why are they giving it a different name and acronym? If it is different, why do we need two similar experiments going on at the same time.

The budget proposal also talks of the creation of a a "Disability Research Center." I am deeply skeptical of this sort of research in general and especially skeptical of the Social Security Administration overseeing it. That is not the agency's mission.

Republicans in Congress will undoubtedly declare this budget "dead on arrival." The Social Security Administration may be lucky to continue spending in FY 2012 at the FY 2010 rate.

Update: The President's budget would increase employment at Social Security from 67,060 under the current CR to 69,306, a 3% increase.

The Commissioner's recommended budget, which, by law, must be conveyed to Congress, is $13.093 billion, 5% higher than the President's recommended budget.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

"work rules that no longer terminates benefits based solely on earnings"

If that statement can be construed as understanding work is a life long activity and people with disabilities may not meet the expected demand correctly each month,each year. Then i agree.

Social security should make the definition three tier,protecting those truly impaired.