The four members of the Social Security Advisory Board, two of them Democratic appointees and two of them Republican appointees, have written to the Chairman and Ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee recommending swift approval of Martin O'Malley's nomination to become Commissioner of Social Security.
They also recommended that the six year terms for Social Security Commissioners end and that they serve at the pleasure of the President. I think it is beyond dispute that six year terms for Social Security Commissioners has been a bad idea which has led to the near impossibility of confirming Commissioners. In any case, due to recent Supreme Court rulings, Commissioners, in effect, serve at the pleasure of the President anyway.
Let's get on with it. Endless Acting Commissioners aren't good for the agency.
2 comments:
While they are at it, they need to look at SSAB. Why does SSA have an advisory board who just parrots what we already know? Why is SSA paying such high salaries to staff with no real SSA experience?
1:12 - what salaries are you speaking of? Yes, these board members get some per diem and I think travel but only the staff gets paid. Per 2022 annual report, they spent $2.5 million with 13 full time support staff.
The SSAB exists by statute. It serves as an outside oversight body. They do get listened to.
Compensation, Expenses and Per Diem
(f) A member of the Board shall, for each day (including travel time) during which the member is attending meetings or conferences of the Board or otherwise engaged in the business of the Board, be compensated at the daily rate of basic pay for Level IV of the Executive Schedule. While serving on business of the Board away from their homes or regular places of business, members may be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by section 5703 of title V, United States Code[2], for persons in the Government employed intermittently.
Post a Comment