From the Social Security part of government reorganization plan (page 127) recently issued by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which is part of the White House:
Eliminate In-Kind Support and Maintenance and the Holding Out Policy for SSI
This proposal simplifies administration of the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program and reduces improper payments. The proposal eliminates the counting of In-Kind Support and Maintenance (ISM) in lieu of a flat rate benefit reduction for adults living with other adults. The proposal also ends the intrusive and burdensome “holding out” policy, which currently reduces benefits for couples that present themselves as married to the community.
Eliminate Services to Claimant Representatives
This proposal would eliminate the Federal Government as the middleman in the relationship between applicants and the representatives they voluntarily hire. It would eliminate administration of fee agreements, fee petitions, and claimant representative travel. The current workload is expensive, error prone, and not SSA’s core mission. In FY 2016, SSA spent about $122 million on the activity, but collected only about $30 million (due to a statutory fee cap) to reimburse the trust funds. The $30 million collected is not currently part of SSA’s administrative resources. ...
Eliminate SSI Dedicated Accounts
This proposal facilitates financial independence by eliminating dedicated accounts for past-due benefits to SSI youth recipients. It also reduces the administrative burden of monitoring expenses from dedicated accounts. ...
Additional Footprint ReductionNote that none of this other than the "Footprint Reduction" can be implemented without legislation and that's not likely to happen and closing offices is certainly unpopular.
SSA continues to find ways to increase real property efficiency and reduce the size of its real property portfolio. SSA will continue to co-locate offices, consolidate space while merging components, and ensure space savings when implementing telework.
12 comments:
reducing the footprint...this will happen. As leases in OHO and other offices expire, the agency is seeking smaller spaces. With people teleworking 3 days per week, less offices are needed. Agency move towards more video hearings requires less physical space. While this may not be as visible as closing field offices, there are actions being taken to reduce the footprint of less visible offices.
Does "Eliminate Services to Claimant Representatives" mean no more withholding of Attorney fees?
Why is the white house intending to ask SSA to eliminate the fee agreement and fee petition process, when this is set by statute? I am uncertain if SSA could eliminate travel reimbursement, but the agreement/petition process is largely not in SSA's control in regard to the actual structure itself.
How the heck can SSA expend $122 million to administer about $1 billion in fees? I'd happily collect my own fee of SSA would let me contract with my client with no percentage or fee cap like those who claim to love free markets would want.
Too many lawyers in Congress for the elimination of involvement in attorney issues -- that dog won't hunt...
The Social Security Administration claims that the cost of administering Attorney Fees costs $122 Million dollars per years. That would be roughly one percent of their entire operations budget. That is beyond being just a lie, it is transparent nonsense.
It appears to be based on the original GAO review that attempted to justify the 6.3% user fee. That study itself was nonsense.
For the typical case, fee agreement approval at any level of adjudication, the actual time spent in calculating and distributing the attorney fee would be calculated in less than five minutes. Remember, regardless of fees, the SSA still needs to note there is a representative and enter that information in the system. The only addition is to also note the fee agreement. The benefit authorizer only needs to push one button noting there is an attorney fee and the rest should be done automatically.
The fees already collected vastly exceed that actual cost of maintaining the current process.
SSA still needs to keep track of reps and make sure they are not scamming Uncle Sam out of money.
No attorney representation and claimant's will be led into the slaughter house like lambs. If this happens they will have to allow attorney's liens on claimants back pay checks or there will be no legal representation in this system except for maybe 2 or 3 legal aid lawyers in a few major cities. Recipe for disaster for the disabled population in this country! Plus, I think no representation would be the last thing ODAR would really want. Can't get over the number of my clients in my red state who voted for this repugnant administration filled with Mick Mulvaneys.
Ending fee withholding would chase the hedge-fund representative groups out of the business; they got into SSD because the government guarantees their fee.
Fewer representatives mean higher denial rates and fewer appeals.
Sounds like a backdoor way of cutting the pay rate and speeding up processing times.
Make past due benefits checks payable to reps and clients jointly and we won't need any assistance in collecting fees. If there is a concern about rep ethics in dealing with fees, then only allow attorneys, who are overseen by State bars, to serve as reps. Why are non-attorneys allowed to practice law before SSA in the first place? I'm not a doctor. Should I still be allowed to walk into the VA to perform an operation and even collect a fee for doing so? I played the operation game as a kid snd did pretty well. That makes me about as qualified to play doctor as many non-attorney reps are qualified to play attorney.
I like the idea of simplifying a system which badly needs it. The only concern is that those who want to cut benefits and representation for the disabled will see it as an opportunity.
Please eliminate the dedicated account it is such a burden to families everywhere
Post a Comment