The Office of Personnel Management
(OPM) has posted updated figures
for the number of employees at the Social Security Administration.
- September 2013 62,543
- June 2013 62,877
- March 2013 63,777
- December 2012 64,538
- September 2012 65,113
- September 2011 67,136
- December 2010 70,270
- December 2009 67,486
- September 2009 67,632
- December 2008 63,733
- September 2008 63,990
- September 2007 62,407
- September 2006 63,647
- September 2005 66,147
- September 2004 65,258
- September 2003 64,903
- September 2002 64,648
- September 2001 65,377
- September 2000 64,521
Since the Republicans took over the House of Representatives in
January 2011, the number of employees at Social Security has gone down
by 7,727, an 11% reduction, in the face of a rapidly increasing
workload.
As a result of the recent budget agreement, Social Security is currently doing some hiring. It's unclear to me whether this will add to Social Security's head count or just slow down the decline in the agency's workforce.
6 comments:
Sure, blame the Republicans, but neither the President nor the Democrat-controlled Senate has stepped up to fight for increased SSA funding.
Phony doctors and lawyers should be barred from SS DIB program. Money saved could be used to hire more employees, who are sorely needed.
Yes, what 12:32 said. Fine, the Republicans control the House. But as we all know from middle school civics, that's not enough to do much of anything. The same Republicans have voted to repeal Obamacare about 489,000 times, but it hasn't happened. And THAT demonstrates the actual power that the house, with Senate and White House Democrats playing along, actually has. Checks and balances, Charles. Come on, now...
So do 6:36 and 12:32 maintain that with a Democratic House, SSA's administrative budget would be just the same? Part of the problem with Washington today is that we have multiple veto points for any spending. One of those veto points is the House. If saying that hurts your feelings because you're a cheerleader for Team Republicans, too bad.
Yeah, I struggled with that logic, too. So the (republican controlled) House kills a bill (authored by Senate democrats and supported by the president and house dems) and somehow the fact that dems control the white house and senate means it was their fault the measure didn't pass? Yes, of course, I see it now...
10:25, 6:36 here. Your comments don't hurt my feelings, for two main reasons: (1) I'm not a cheerleader for Team Republican, but thanks for the gratuitous presumption, and (2) your mildly applicable point didn't exactly pack a punch. Your actual, exact line of reasoning can be applied to the Senate and White House, too. That said, it's a weak line of reasoning, but I digress...
Post a Comment