There Was A Celebration Of Social Security's 89th Birthday At The White House

 Click on each image to view full size.

It's Been Over 57 Years

LBJ at SSA Headquarters

     The recent visit to Social Security headquarters by former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi reminds me that the last time that a President visited Social Security was October 12, 1966. Lyndon Johnson was the President. Given Social Security's importance to the American people, it seems extraordinary to me that no President has visited Social Security headquarters in such a long time.

Biden Proposes 9% Increase In Social Security Operating Funds

     From President Biden's budget proposal for Fiscal Year 2025, which begins on October 1, 2024:

... The Budget provides an increase of $1.3 billion, nine percent over the 2023 enacted level, to improve customer service at SSA’s field offices, State disability determination services, and teleservice centers for retirees, individuals with disabilities, and their families. The Budget also improves access to SSA’s services by reducing wait times. ...

    Nothing like this can be passed until after the election and only then if Democrats control the White House, Senate and House of Representatives -- and Senate Democrats are willing to scrap the filibuster, at least in part.

    In the lengthy supplement to the budget, the detailed explanation shows that program integrity would not increase. One complaint about recent appropriations is that there has been lavish funding of program integrity while basic operations have suffered greatly.

    The Commissioner of Social Security gets to include his own proposed budget for the agency in the supplement to the budget. Commissioner O'Malley's proposal is for the agency to be funded at $16.45 billion, about three quarters of a billion dollars higher than the President's budget but O'Malley has issued a statement praising the President's budget.

    The proposals of the President and the Commissioner are nice but restoring acceptable service at the Social Security Administration will have to be a multi-year effort.

    By the way, the Biden budget also calls for extending SSI to U.S. territories, such as Puerto Rico.

A Poll

online polls

It's Been Slow Lately

     You may have noticed that I'm not posting much recently. That doesn't have to do with me. There is little to report. Things aren't changing for good or ill. Some of this is Congress. They're doing little with Social Security. Oversight hearings seem to be nearly a thing of the past. There's no hope of passing Social Security legislation. Some of it may be due to lingering effects of the pandemic. Until recently, there was little time to develop new policies for anything other than coping with Covid. Policy development was and is difficult anyway with people working from home most of the time. However, I think a lot of the torpor at Social Security has to do with the fact that there's no confirmed Commissioner of Social Security. An Acting Commissioner can't lead in the same way that a confirmed Commissioner can. Yes, there's a real potential for bad new policies as well as good with a confirmed Commissioner but sitting dead in the water for years on end isn't good for the agency or the people it serves. The lack of action on an occupational information system is one prominent example of the lack of leadership at Social Security.

    So, why hasn't the President nominated a new Commissioner?

Video CEs To Continue On Limited Basis

     Prior to the Covid pandemic, the Social Security Administration used video technology to perform consultative medical examinations (CEs) -- to help evaluate disability claims -- on a very limited basis. For understandable reasons, the agency has made much more extensive use of video technology for CEs during the pandemic but the pandemic is waning. The President has declared that the Public Health Emergency will end on May 11, 2023. Social Security has just issued an Emergency Message detailing how it will use video technology for CEs after May 11. They will use video technology only for psychiatric CEs, psychological CEs without standardized testing and speech and language CEs. The claimant must agree to the video CE.

Sound And Fury, Signifying Nothing

     From Reuters:

A Republican U.S. senator's accusation on Thursday that Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen had lied during a tussle over the future of the Social Security program obscured behind-the-scenes talks between the White House and lawmakers that have been underway for months, according to sources. 

The war of words came in a Senate Finance Committee hearing when Republican Senator Bill Cassidy asked Yellen if Democratic President Joe Biden was aware that Social Security funds will run out within the next decade unless Congress shores up the popular retirement program with 66 million beneficiaries.

When Yellen responded that Biden "stands ready to work" with lawmakers, Cassidy shot back, "That's a lie because when a bipartisan group of senators has repeatedly requested to meet with him about Social (Security) ... we have not heard anything on our requests."

For several months now, Cassidy and independent Senator Angus King, who caucuses with Democrats, have tried to address Social Security underfunding as approximately 10,000 baby boomers retire every day. ...

 Cassidy and King are leading a group of workhorse senators that include Republican Mike Rounds, Democrat Tim Kaine and independent Kyrsten Sinema. ...

"It's going to be tough. I don't think we should sugarcoat it. But there are serious conversations in the Senate ... on a package that would improve Social Security's finances," said Shai Akabas, economic policy director at the Bipartisan Policy Center, a centrist think tank in Washington. ...

    The Republican plan is to have a very few Republicans work with a very few Democrats to come up with a wildly unpopular plan that includes an increase in full retirement age. Republicans will provide only a few votes to pass the plan. It will only be passed if Biden strong arms Democrats and probably not even then. Republicans will then run against Democrats on the issue.

    Biden won't fall for this.

    By the way, I'm sure that the Democrats involved with these negotiations are well intentioned but they're fools. This is a dead end.

Does Political Messaging Matter?

    From the Washington Post:

 In that Jan. 25 meeting [with the President], [Senator Bernie] Sanders pushed the president to fully fund Social Security for more than seven decades by expanding payroll taxes on affluent Americans, rather than just on workers’ first $160,000 in earnings, as is the case under current law. Sanders also asked the president to back his proposal — highly unlikely to pass Congress — to not only defend existing benefits but also increase them. He wants to provide another $2,400 per year for every Social Security beneficiary.

This previously unreported discussion between Biden and his onetime presidential primary rival reflects a broader behind-the-scenes effort inside the White House to decide how, or if, the party’s message on entitlements should go beyond criticizing the GOP. ...

Biden aides have in recent weeks discussed proposing raising payroll taxes on the rich to fund Social Security, but it is unclear if the president will ultimately endorse that measure when he releases his budget in March, according to three people familiar with international deliberations. ...

“There’s a faction inside the White House that feels some need to offer a plan, though I personally feel that’s misplaced,” one senior Democratic pollster said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations with senior administration officials. “Stick to our basic message: Hands off our seniors. That’s working.” ...

    Note that these are discussions about political messaging. No tax increases are happening with Republicans in control of the House of Representatives. The Republican message that "We'll never agree to tax increases so Democrats, not Republicans, must propose benefit cuts" won't ever lead to a solution.

    It's apparent to me how Social Security's long-term financing issues will be resolved. Eventually, Democrats will have a great election cycle and have enough strength in Congress to pass a bill. Until then, it's just posturing but today's political messaging can become tomorrow's enacted fix for Social Security so the posturing matters. If Democrats don't have such an election cycle in time, it's going to be a train wreck, mainly for the GOP which will be caught between its ideology and the great majority of the country which loves Social Security and doesn't want to see it cut.

We're All In Agreement, Right?

     From USA Today:

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., stood up from her seat in the back of the House chamber to heckle President Joe Biden after he said during his State of the Union address Tuesday that “some Republicans want Medicare and Social Security to sunset” while discussing the need to raise the debt ceiling in order to avoid a US default.

“Liar!” she said. Other lawmakers in the chamber booed him. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, seated behind Biden, shook his head in disapproval.  ...

As boos continued, Biden turned toward the House gallery to address an audience member not seen on camera. 

"It's being proposed by individuals," he said. "I'm politely not naming them, but it's being proposed by some of you."  ...

As the camera landed on individual lawmakers, it captured a shot of a stunned Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah [who has openly talked about his desire to 'phase out" Social Security], who looked around the room with his mouth wide open. 

“So folks, as we all apparently agree, Social Security and Medicare is off the books now,” Biden said. “They're not to be touched? All right. We've got unanimity!"

Cheers erupted in the chamber.

"Tonight, let's all agree, and apparently we are — let's stand up for seniors," Biden said, raising his fists in the air. Speaker McCarthy took to his feet. ...

Some Listings Will Become Harder To Meet

     Social Security's musculoskeletal Listings will become harder to meet this November. As written many of these Listings require that all relevant criteria be present simultaneously or "within a close proximity of time." Because of the Covid-19 pandemic this became hard to prove since access to healthcare, particularly in person health care, became more difficult. In July 2021 Social Security adopted a temporary rule loosening these requirements until "6 months after the effective date of a determination by the Secretary of Health and Human Services under section 319 of the Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 247d, that the national public health emergency resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic no longer exists." Newspapers are reporting that the President plans to issue an order ending the public health emergency on May 11, 2023. Thus, the Listings will become harder to meet as of Veterans Day in November. 

    The musculoskeletal Listings have been too hard to meet even with the temporary rule in place suspending some of their worst aspects. They will become even more harsh. They need re-examination.

Now How About A Commissioner Nomination?

     The President has nominated Kathryn Lang to became a member of the Social Security Advisory Board. Lang is Director of Federal Income Security at Justice in Aging, a national non-profit legal organization that fights against senior poverty. She has worked with Social Security and SSI issues.

No Social Security For Trump

     I took a look at Donald Trump’s recently released tax returns. Despite being well past age 70, he hasn’t reported Social Security benefit payments. Maybe he didn’t bother to apply. Maybe he didn’t have a history of wages that would qualify him. For that matter, Melania isn’t receiving Social Security benefits either but she’s only 52.

     Trump is so grasping, it would be hard for me to imagine him not reaching out for the income but he’s so incompetent I can suppose it wouldn’t have occurred to him.

     By the way, please, if you’re a Social Security employee, don’t try to look up Trump’s earnings record. You won’t succeed but you will be fired.

     Also by the way, President Biden is receiving Social Security retirement benefits.

Could We See A Commissioner Nomination Next Year?

     Democrats will have 50 Senators in the new Congress and Republicans 49. Senator Sinema will continue her effort to be the most complete flake possible as an Independent. She may or may not caucus with Democrats but this still leaves Democrats with a majority without needing the Vice President’s vote. That doesn’t sound like much of a difference from the current Congress but the Washington Post reports that the extra Senator makes plenty of difference, particularly with confirmation of nominations. Will President Biden finally nominate a new Commissioner of Social Security next year?

How Much Is Joe Biden Receiving In Social Security Benefits?

     We don't have the figure just for the President but Joe and Jill Biden together received $54,665 last year from Social Security or about $4,555 per month.

Will Social Security Be An Issue In The 2022 Elections?

     From Fox News:

President Biden on Monday commemorated the 87th anniversary of the Social Security Act becoming law by touting Democrat plans to protect, expand and deliver "stronger" benefits to recipients, while warning that a Republican-controlled Congress could put the program "on the chopping block."  ...

Look, if you know me, you know I think rebuilding the middle class is the moral obligation of our time," Biden says in the video. "Social Security allows for our seniors to retire with dignity, and me and my Democratic friends on the hill are trying to protect it and expand it." ...

"But here’s what’s crazy," Biden continued. "Republicans on the hill—they want to put it on the chopping block."

"Every five years it would come up to reconsideration, whether it continues or not," Biden said. "Think about that."

Biden was referring to a plan Republican Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., proposed earlier this year that would sunset Social Security and Medicare within five years.

"Let me ask you have you ever seen the Republicans on Capitol Hill do anything to protect or increase or to benefit Social Security?" Biden asked. ...

"So here’s the deal, with Democrats in Congress, you get stronger social security because you paid for it and you deserve it," Biden said. "With Republicans in Congress, it’s probably going to get sliced." ...

But Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., shut down Scott’s proposal earlier this year, stressing that Republicans "will not have as part of our agenda a bill that raises taxes on half the American people and sunsets Social Security and Medicare within five years." ...

There Is No Free Lunch Nor Is There Any Free Way To Improve The Customer Experience At Social Security

     From Government Executive:

The White House wants to fundamentally change the way Americans access government services and benefits by focusing on the "life experiences" of those seeking assistance. ...

One type of improvement the administration is aiming for is decreasing the number of applications people have to fill out to get government programs.

Efforts to remake how people connect with government programs as they retire will include making a system where "any route you begin (via SSA, Medicare, other supports) leads you to an integrated experience that only requires giving the government information once," for example. ...

A new goal: for Americans seeing services to be able to apply in 20 minutes, enroll in 24 hours and get services in a week. ...

In terms of funding, "in many cases, service design improvements can be made at little to no cost. Depending on the life experience, digital design may need IT or people investments in order to design and build new digital solutions," the OMB spokesperson said, continuing on to say that the new framework ultimately "isn't about net new things" but instead "doing what we're already doing better." ...

Social Security Directed To Stop Requiring So Many Wet Signatures

      From an Executive Order signed by President Biden on December 13:

... (k)  The Commissioner of Social Security shall:
            (i) within 120 days of the date of this order, provide a report to the Director of OMB [Office of Management and Budget] that analyzes all services of the Social Security Administration that currently require original or physical documentation or in-person appearance as an element of identity or evidence authentication, and that identifies potential opportunities for policy reforms that can support modernized customer experiences while ensuring original or physical documentation requirements remain where there is a statutory or strong policy rationale;
            (ii) develop a mobile-accessible, online process so that any individual applying for or receiving services from the Social Security Administration can upload forms, documentation, evidence, or correspondence associated with their transaction without the need for service-specific tools or traveling to a field office;
            (iii) consistent with applicable law and to the extent practicable, maintain a public policy of technology neutrality with respect to acceptable forms of electronic signatures;
           (iv) consistent with applicable law and to the extent practicable, revise any necessary regulations, forms, instructions, or other sources of guidance (to include the Program Operations Manual System of the Social Security Administration) to remove requirements that members of the public provide physical signatures; and
            (v) to the maximum extent permitted by law, support applicants and beneficiaries to identify other benefits for which they may be eligible and integrate Social Security Administration data and processes with those of other Federal and State entities whenever possible. ...

     Should anything at Social Security really require a wet signature? I'd say "no."

Hoist With Their Own Petard And Getting No Sympathy From Me

      From the Washington Post:

Ousted Social Security commissioner Andrew Saul, the Trump appointee who declared Friday he would defy his firing by President Biden, on Monday found his access to agency computers cut off, even as his acting replacement moved to undo his policies.

“I’m here to do the job,” Saul said from his home in Katonah, N.Y., where he had led the agency since the coronavirus pandemic forced most operations to shift in March 2020 to remote work, “but I can’t do anything with the communications shut down.”

 Saul, 74, called his firing and that of his deputy David Black, in an email from the White House Personnel Office, a “palace coup” ...

“There will be more,” said Saul, a wealthy former women’s apparel executive and prominent Republican donor who had served on the board of a conservative think tank that has called for cuts to Social Security benefits. “Stay tuned.” ...

His acting successor, Biden appointee Kilolo Kijakazi, took the reins Monday and was briefed by her staff on the agency’s top priorities, advocates in touch with her office said, including much anticipated planning for the safe reopening of Social Security’s national network of 1,200 field offices. ...

Senate GOP aides, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss political strategy, said they plan floor speeches starting this week ... to express their dismay with the White House. ...

Republicans also said they are considering procedural actions to block any permanent Biden nominees to the agency on the Senate floor.

“It’s not like Saul was a blazing partisan,” said one Senate GOP aide. “Our view is that longer terms for agencies like this exist for a reason.” ...

     There's so much here! Saul calls his ouster a "palace coup." What? Did he think he was a king? A threat of litigation? I'm sure the President is quaking in fear. Read the recent opinions of the Supreme Court and see if you think whatever lawsuit Saul files is going to get anywhere. Dark threats of procedural actions to block a nomination? I'm pretty sure that's not possible under current Senate rules. Saul not a "blazing partisan"? Are you kidding me? I can't even imagine what they think a "blazing partisan" would look like at Social Security if Saul wasn't one. Now they think that longer terms exist for a reason. Republicans are the ones who came up with the unitary executive theory that blew up longer terms. Do they think they're the only ones who get to use the unitary executive theory? Hoist with their own petard and getting no sympathy from me.

Social Security Legislation Coming Next Year?

      From the New York Times:

… Mr. Biden campaigned on increasing Social Security benefits for many Americans and moving to shore up the program’s finances, funded by higher payroll taxes on workers who earn $400,000 or more.

But his $4 trillion agenda has thus far excluded those efforts, which were also excluded from his first formal budget request as president. Administration officials have suggested privately that Mr. Biden will wait to push Social Security changes later in his term, once he has completed work on infrastructure and other efforts to remake the American economy with a larger role for government.

Mr. Brady and Mr. Crapo [two Republican Senators] alluded to that proposal in their reaction to the firing. “We are concerned that this politicization of the Social Security Administration is just the beginning of efforts to raise payroll taxes,” they said, “and seriously undermines bipartisan efforts to save Social Security for future retirees.

     Do Republicans want to filibuster a bill that would increase Social Security benefits in an election year? Is opposing an increase in the FICA tax that would only apply to those with high incomes a political winner for the GOP?

Social Security's Chief Actuary Responds To Concerns Of GOP Senators

      Some Democratic Senators asked Social Security's Chief Actuary what the effect would be upon the Social Security Trust Funds if the President's proposal to end the F.I.C.A. tax that supports the Trust Funds is ended, without any replacement. Trump didn't say that this would be without a replacement but he didn't specify a replacement. The response, of course, is that the Trust Funds would quickly run out of money and be unable to pay benefits. The Chief Actuary's response has now appeared in campaign ads.

     Some Republican Senators took offense at this and sent the Chief Actuary a letter complaining about his letter. I'd say they should blame the President for making a bone-headed proposal that would inevitably sound foolish in a TV ad. Responding to Congressional inquiries is part of the Chief Actuary's job. He can't very well say "I'm not going to answer your question because the answer would make the President sound foolish and irresponsible and I don't think he meant to sound that way."

     The Chief Actuary has now responded. Here's part of the final paragraph of the letter:

... While it is never desirable for the Office of the Chief Actuary to engage in matters with political implications, it appears that this is unavoidable to a degree, as long as we are asked to provide objective and factual answers to questions posed by members of Congress. Our answers have always been as direct and objective as possible, and we regret that even clear answers may be taken out of context or used for purposes other than intended. ...