Results Of Last Week's Unscientific Poll

When were you born?

1929 or earlier (1)	1%
1930-1939 (3)	2%
1940-1949 (35)	26%
1950-1959 (47)	35%
1960-1969 (20)	15%
1970-1979 (22)	17%
1980-1989 (5)	4%
1990 or later (0)	0%

Total Votes: 133

CCD Lays Out Its Agenda

Groups are already laying out their agendas for what they expect to be a Democratic party ascendancy to come next year. The Coalition for Citizens with Disabilities (CCD) is the major umbrella group representing just about all groups of any consequence who advocate on behalf of the disabled. The CCD has issued a Statement of Principles on work incentives and other issues affecting Social Security's disability programs. I am sure that the CCD would be happy to get any of this enacted this year -- and it is possible that a little could be enacted this year -- but mostly this is the CCD agenda for the next Congress and the next President. This deserves close attention. In my opinion, much of this is likely to become law if Democrats capture the White House as well as larger majorities in both Houses of Congress, something which looks likely at the moment.

Here are what I think of as the major points from CCD's statement of principles:

1. No change in Social Security's definition of disability, nor anything designed to force disabled people back to work, such as time limited benefits;
2. An increase in the earnings limits for Supplemental Security Income (SSI);
3. Changing work incentives in Title II of the Social Security Act so that the disabled lose one dollar for each two dollars they earn;
4. An indefinite presumptive disability status for those whose disability benefits end due to return to work;
5. Allowing health insurance expenses to count as Impairment Related Work Expenses;
6. Improving the ability of child SSI recipients to make the transition to work;
7. Eliminating the five month waiting period for Disability Insurance Benefits;
8. Improving Ticket to Work;
9. Improving tracking of earnings for disabled people who return to work to help avoid large overpayments;
10. Eliminating the 24 month waiting period for Medicare;
11. Allow premium fee access to Medicare for beneficiaries who return to work;
12. Allow individuals to get on Disabled Adult Child (DAC) benefits despite some work activity after becoming 22 years of age;
13. Exempt DAC recipients from the family maximum if they live outside the family home;
14. Eliminate the DAC marriage penalty;
15. Improve the minimum benefit;
16. Repeal the seven year prescribed period for disabled widows and widowers; and
    
17. Increase disabled widows benefits

I cannot understand why the CCD does not want to pull the plug on Ticket to Work. It is nothing but a bottomless money pit. Merely sounding like it would be a good idea does not make it a good idea.

I cannot understand why CCD would talk about improving disabled widows and widowers benefits, but not mention ending the actuarial reduction in disabled widows and widowers benefits. Is it possible that CCD does not understand the actuarial reduction? I know that the phrase "actuarial reduction" sounds like it must be something impossibly complicated. Let me make it simple. The younger the disabled widow or widower is when he or she goes on benefits, the less he or she receives in disabled widow or widower benefits. Does it make sense to penalize people for becoming disabled at an earlier age?

NADE Newsletter

The National Association of Disability Examiners (NADE), an organization of people who work at the state Disability Determination Services, has issued its Winter 2008 newsletter.

One small note from the newsletter: Pat Owens who had been Associate Commissioner for Disability at Social Security in the 1980s and who was later employed by UNUM, the country's largest writer of Long Term Disability Insurance, is now working for the Government Accountability Office (GAO).

Astrue To Visit Missoula

From Montana's News Station.com:

U.S. Sen. Max Baucus says Social Security Commissioner Michael Astrue has accepted his invitation to attend a community forum in Missoula on Feb. 21.

Baucus says the invitation was part of his ongoing efforts to cut down the time it takes for Montanans to get Social Security retirement and disability benefits. He says the forum will allow Astrue to see how the Social Security filing process is faring in Montana, and to discuss ways to improve it.

Baucus is chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, which has jurisdiction over Social Security.

Republican Congressmen Promote Biometric Social Security Cards

The Chicago Tribune reports that two Republican Congressmen from Illinois are introducing a bill requiring that Social Security cards include a photograph, fingerprint, computer chip, bar code and magnetic strip. The idea is to help prevent identity theft. The Congressmen described this as only a "modest upgrade."

If this were to happen, the Social Security Administration would be dramatically transformed, perhaps doubling its staff.

CLE Webcast

The Disability Advocacy Section (which is basically the Social Security section) of the North Carolina Academy of Trial Lawyers is putting on a Continuing Legal Education (CLE) on March 28, 2008 entitled "An Overview of Medicare and Medicaid" for attorneys and others who represent Social Security claimants. The CLE is available as a webcast. You do not have to be a member of the section or of the NC Academy of Trial Lawyers. The issues being discussed are national. Registrants from outside North Carolina are welcome. CLE credit is available. Information is available online.

What Is Going On With Emergency Messages?

Yesterday, I posted the text of an "Emergency Message" from the Social Security Administration about Social Security's role in the economic stimulus package. Shortly after I posted the Emergency Message or EM, it disappeared from Social Security's website.

Social Security has used EMs, or their predecessor, Emergency Teletypes, for many years to convey important information to Social Security employees. Usually, EMs are not concerned with true emergencies. They just convey staff instructions, usually concerning new issues. As such, they are a matter of legitimate interest to anyone dealing with the agency.

Take a look at Social Security's online list of EMs. Note that they seem to be numbered sequentially. The most recent EM shown is 08013. It appears that the "08" part is the year and the number thereafter is a sequential number. Note how many gaps there are in the sequence. We are up to EM-08013 online, but there are only two EMs showing up online for 2008.

What is going on? JOA on the SSAConnect Board tells us that Social Security is labeling many EMs as "sensitive" and distributing them only to Social Security employees. Apparently, Social Security decided to make EM-08-021 "sensitive" after first posting it online. It appears to me that Social Security has been labeling more and more EMs as sensitive and trying to withhold them from the public.

Why is Social Security doing this? I cannot say, but it is hard to imagine that anything being made available to tens of thousands of Social Security employees is truly sensitive. If the EM that I posted is an example of what Social Security is labeling "sensitive", you have to wonder what the criteria are for determining what is so "sensitive" that it must be withheld from the public. The only thing "sensitive" about that EM was the revelation that the Social Security Administration wants to stay out of the business of advising claimants on how they can obtain a check under the economic stimulus plan. I suppose that this might be embarrassing to the agency brass since Social Security is getting a $31 million appropriation for its part in the economic stimulus plan or because it illustrates the fact that Social Security is short-handed, but that hardly seems to me to make it "sensitive."

Trying to keep these secret seems contrary to Social Security's publicly stated position that "Administrative staff manuals of the Social Security Administration and Instructions to staff personnel that contain policies, procedures, or interpretations that affect the public are available for inspection and copying."

If nothing else, trying to suppress an emergency message that clearly contains no sensitive information after the emergency message has already entered the public domain just makes the Social Security Administration look ridiculous.

I have made a Freedom of Information Act requests for all of these sensitive EMs since the beginning of 2007. Once I get them, I will post all of them. We will eventually see what Social Security is trying to keep from the public. How soon that may be is unclear.

Over The Top Press Release

This appeared in the Corsicana Daily Sun. It is obviously a Social Security press release, although it is attributed to the local District Office manager. I do not blame Social Security for trying to promote online services, but this is ridiculous.

As you’re preparing your Valentine’s cards, you may also want to join the millions of users who have fallen in love with Social Security’s online services. Here’s our own Valentine’s sampler of things you can do at www.socialsecurity.gov. ...

Whether you’re ready to apply for retirement benefits this month or you’re just interested in getting an estimate for future benefits, check out our website at www.socialsecurity.gov and go to the “What you can do online” section. We won’t try to take the place of your sweetheart this Valentine’s Day, but you may fall in love with our online services.

Social Security Role In Economic Stimulus

This is Social Security's Emergency Message EM-08021. This went out yesterday (Later addition: Since I posted this, the Social Security Administration has taken down the link. I can only guess that the EM was too blunt. Anyway, here it is for all to read, so it can hardly be described as a secret.):

President Bush signed an economic stimulus bill on February 13th which will result in stimulus payments to over 130 million individuals starting in May 2008.

Attached is an IRS fact sheet which provides more details and eligibility information regarding the stimulus payments. NOTE: it is not SSA’s role to explain the stimulus program to the public, so you should not offer verbal explanations of information on the factsheet—except as it relates to the need for a 1099 (see item 3 below).

There are four key points:

1. This is an IRS program and we need to refer questions about the stimulus payments to IRS, at either their website (www.irs.gov) or their 800 number (1-800-829-1040).

2. To receive a payment, individuals must file a tax return for 2007. There are approximately 20 million Social Security beneficiaries who would not normally file a tax return for 2007, but will need to file a tax return for 2007 to receive a stimulus payment.

3. All beneficiaries received an SSA-1099 earlier this year related to their 2007 Social Security payments. Some of the 20 million beneficiaries may have discarded their 1099. They do not need a replacement 1099 because IRS will accept an estimate of Social Security benefits received in 2007 in line 14A of the 1040A. A beneficiary can just multiply their 2007 monthly benefit amount times the number of months they received benefits in 2007. IRS will match this estimate against the 1099 file that we provide them to determine if the person meets the income threshold.

4. Receipt of SSI benefits does not count in determining eligibility for stimulus payments.

FO Instructions

Processing Inquiries-

Please print the attached IRS fact sheet in sufficient quantities to distribute to visitors who inquire about stimulus payments. You may also want to provide the fact sheet to any visitor who is a Title II beneficiary. If someone calls the FO about the stimulus payment, please refer them to the IRS web site at www.irs.gov and the IRS 800 number (1-800-829-1040). Do not mail them the fact sheet.

If a beneficiary insists on receiving a replacement SSA-1099 you can issue it to them following the instructions in POMS GN 05002.220.


Counting Inquiries and Replacement 1099s-

It is important that we capture data on the number of FO visitors whose visit is prompted by the Economic Stimulus program. When a field office visitor inquires about the Economic Stimulus Bill or requests a replacement 1099, follow these instructions:

1. Make sure they are checked into VIP.
2. Change the “Number of Interviews” box on the “Add Visitor Information” or “Modify Contact Information” screens to the number 99.
3. Finish the interview and close out VIP using standard procedures.

Do not capture telephone inquiries using this VIP procedure. Instructions for capturing field office telephone inquiries will be forthcoming.

800 Number Instructions

An upfront message will be added to the 800 number this week directing callers with questions on the stimulus payments to contact IRS. If a caller reaches an agent and has a question about the stimulus payment, refer them to the IRS web site (www.irs.gov) and 800 number (1-800-829-1040). Do not discuss the IRS factsheet nor mail the caller a copy of it.

If they ask about a replacement SSA-1099 tell them that IRS will accept an estimate, advise them to estimate the amount of benefits received by multiplying the monthly benefit amount in 2007 times the number of months they received benefits. If a beneficiary insists on a replacement SSA-1099, see TC 37001.030.

Instructions for capturing the volume of 800 Number calls involving Economic Stimulus Package inquiries will be forthcoming.

Representative Johnson On ALJ Accountability

A press release from Representative Sam Johnson, the ranking Republican on the House Ways and Means Subcommittee:

Yesterday the Office of Inspector General of the Social Security Administration (SSA) released a report which evaluated the caseload performance of Administrative Law Judges (ALJs). The report found that SSA's efforts to reduce the growing backlog will be negatively impacted by the under-performance of many existing ALJs. Social Security Subcommittee Ranking Member, Sam Johnson (R-TX), released the following statement:

"The report by the Inspector General sends a clear message that no meaningful reform of the disability process can be complete without addressing the inability of certain ALJs to perform at an acceptable level. Not only does this report show that certain judges are under-performing, it also points out that the SSA has no process to hold them accountable. This is simply unacceptable.

"Last December, Chairman McNulty (D-NY) and I asked the Inspector General to dig deeper into this issue and provide the Congress with a full report on ALJ performance. I am confident that a complete investigation will better inform Commissioner Astrue and the Congress on how to best address this issue. The American people must know that their tax dollars are spent wisely and efficiently.

"American citizens should not have to wait years to learn whether they are eligible to obtain a benefit they have earned. I look forward to receiving the additional findings of the Inspector General's review, and continuing to work with the Commissioner to better serve those in need."

Administrative Law Judges hold impartial hearings and review on appeal determinations involving retirement, survivors, disability, and supplemental security income benefits