Raise The Death Benefit?

From The Sun of San Bernardino, CA:

Americans who lose a spouse would get more money from Social Security under a bill introduced by Rep. Joe Baca, but critics worry the plan would put more pressure on an entitlement system already on the verge of going broke.

When a Social Security recipient dies, their surviving spouse receives a one-time payment of $255, but they miss out on their spouse's regular Social Security check for that month.

Baca, D-San Bernardino, wants to change that, giving surviving spouses a larger "death payment" and a check for the deceased's final days. ...

Baca's bill - called the Benefit Adjustment of Social Security Income Compensation, or BASIC - calls for increasing the size of the death payment from $255 to 47 percent of the deceased person's typical monthly Social Security income, with $255 as the minimum payment.

The bill also calls for paying Social Security benefits for each day - not just each whole month - a recipient lives. At present, Baca's office said, the spouse of a Social Security beneficiary who dies May 15 will not receive their spouse's check for May. Baca's plan would send a check for half the month, on top of the death payment.

I have no idea whether this has a chance but we ought to do something about the death benefit -- either abolish it or make it more meaningful. At the moment, it probably costs about as much to administer it as it does to actually pay the benefits. My opinion is that if we are going to have a death benefit that it ought to be several times the Primary Insurance Amount (PIA), that is the monthly amount paid to the primary beneficiary on an account.

Service Delivery Hearing

The House Social Security Subcommittee hearing on service delivery at Social Security's field offices has begun. Here are some excerpts from the written testimony:

• Barbara Bovbjerg of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) :

In our January 2009 report, we recommended that SSA [Social Security Administration] establish standards for field office customer waiting times and phone service to help identify and improve offices with poor service. SSA did not act on this recommendation stating that it would create problems by diverting staff already spread thin across field offices.

• Joe Dirago, Manager Newburgh Field Office and President of the National Council of Social Security Management Associations (NCSSMA):

Field Offices are also having difficulties with some law firms that advertise nationwide to take claims and appeals for claimants. The work product is often deficient, or some send us only skeleton Internet applications. Often we spend months trying to get all the information we need to process the claim, which disadvantages the claimant. Many attorneys will not file their claims and appeals electronically. Field Offices have to manually load these paper applications into our system, which is labor intensive. We believe there should be greater accountability for law firms that represent claimants; otherwise they should collect their own fees instead of SSA doing so.

• Billie Armenta, Manager Phoenix Downtown Field Office and Secretary of NCSSMA:

In many of our busiest offices, customers line up as early as 7:00 AM to make sure that they can be served when the office doors open. This can lead to security issues when people try to cut the line or become frustrated with waiting.

• Witold Skwierczynski, President, National Council of SSA Field Operations Locals, American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) , AFL-CIO:

Commissioner Astrue has testified that iClaims are more accurate than claims taken by SSA employees. What he is not telling Congress is that ALL iClaims are reviewed and corrected by SSA employees before payment can be authorized. In addition, the most common error, incorrect month of election, is not considered an error under Commissioner Astrue’s financial literacy concept. Under this philosophy the client is responsible for determining the best time to begin their benefits and the SSA employee shouldn’t interfere in that decision even if the claimant's choice appears clearly disadvantageous. This philosophy as led to many claimants making uninformed decisions which will result in thousands of dollars in lost benefits. However, since claimants can’t make errors regarding the month they elect benefits, SSA’s Internet statistics look good.

SSA does not and will not perform audits on the Internet claims at the point they are submitted by the applicant. Instead, the claim is reviewed after an SSA employee makes the necessary corrections. This creates the illusion that the public completed the claims correctly. ...

The Commissioner announced last year that SSA’s iClaims process would allow claimants to file Internet claims without SSA employee review starting this year. SSA employees and AFGE were shocked and appalled that such changes would proceed, due to the vast number of claims that require correction before decisions about entitlement or payment amount are effectuated. The Commissioner has delayed implementation of a non‐reviewed iclaims filing process. This delay should be permanent. ...

While resources are limited and field/TSC [Teleservice Centers] staffing levels have not increased in relation to additional workloads, SSA management continues to engage in unethical behavior in processing work and measuring the amount of work completed. SSA management engages in a variety of questionable practices which are designed to enhance individual office statistical performance. Such practices include processing claims for individuals who are clearly ineligible for benefits, and padding statistics by taking unnecessary actions such as reissuing Medicare cards to every client in the office whether or not they request such cards. Systems tricks are employed by some managers to reflect inaccurate processing times in order to claim better statistical performance.

Skwierczynski undermines his credibility by coming across as an angry man. This does not mean that what he is saying is wrong. He knows what he is talking about.

Astrue Testimony To House Appropriations Committee

Commissioner Astrue's testimony before the House Appropriations Committee has now been posted online. The testimony is about what one would expect: well justified pride about what has been accomplished with higher appropriations in fiscal years (FYs) 2009 and 2010 and a plea for quick passage of the President's recommended appropriation for Social Security for FY 2011.

To the left is a chart from that testimony setting forth the projections being used to prepare the current and future budgets for Social Security. It assumes much higher new claims than was the case when last year's budget was prepared.

There is one ever so tiny appropriation in the bill for one person. The special age 72 benefit that began in 1968 has dwindled down to the point that an appropriation of only $4,000 is sought for FY 2011 which is for the last person on those benefits. I wonder how old that person is. Social Security's role in the Black Lung program is also rapidly coming to an end. No appropriation is sought for FY 2011 since there is adequate money left over from prior years.

There is one item mentioned in Commissioner Astrue's written statement that I hope Committee staff will be exploring and that is the work of the Occupational Information Development Advisory Panel (OIDAP). Exactly what Social Security is up to with this is unclear. This makes me and a number of other people nervous.

Hearing Office Processing Time Report

From the newsletter of the National Organization of Social Security Claimants Representatives (NOSSCR). The original is also a bit fuzzy. Click on each thumbnail to see it full size.

Witness List For Tomorrow's Hearing

Below is the witness list for tomorrow's hearing of the Social Security Subcommittee of the House Ways and Means Committee. I would like to read Commissioner Astrue's testimony before the House Appropriations Committee today but there is a bad link on that Committee's website.

Update: The bad link has now been corrected. Here is Commissioner Astrue's testimony.

PANEL:

• Barbara Bovbjerg, Managing Director for Education, Workforce and Income Security Issues, Government Accountability Office
• Joe Dirago, Manager, Social Security Administration Newburgh Field Office and President, National Council of Social Security Management Associations, Newburgh, New York
• Billie Armenta, District Manager, Social Security Administration Phoenix Downtown District Office and Secretary, National Council of Social Security ManagementAssociations, Phoenix, Arizona
• Witold Skwierczynski, President, National Council of SSA Field Operations Locals, American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Baltimore, Maryland
• Daniel Woosley, Generalist Claims Representative, Social Security Administration Louisville West Field Office and Executive Vice President of Kentucky Local 3984,
• National Council of SSA Field Operations Locals, American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Louisville, Kentucky
• The Honorable Patrick P. O’Carroll, Inspector General, Social Security Administration

PANEL:

• The Honorable Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner, Social Security Administration

Social Security Employment Stabilizes

Below are the December 2009 figures for the number of employees at Social Security, recently released by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), along with earlier figures for comparison purposes.

• December 2009 67,486
  
• September 2009 67,632
  
• June 2009 66,614
  
• March 2009 63,229
  
• 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
• September 1999 63,957
• September 1998 65,629

A National Disgrace

From the Bradenton, FL Herald:

We cannot imagine the suffering not only from debilitating pain but from the extreme wait times for hearings on applications for Social Security Disability Insurance. The average wait in Florida stands at 470 days.

That is unconscionable. And unacceptable.

Sarasota resident Thomas Presha’s fate is worse. He’s been waiting more than two years for a hearing before a Social Security Administration administrative law judge. ...

How can a civilized society let that happen? ...

Presha’s Bradenton attorney, Terri F. Cromley, calls the current setup a “horrible process,” one that has left many of her clients homeless. ...

Rep. Kathy Castor, D-Tampa, has the right idea. She’s pushing legislation that would force the SSA to schedule a hearing within five business days of receiving a request, actually holding the hearing between 60 to 75 days later, and then issuing a decision within another 15 days of the hearing. That’s far more reasonable and certainly more humane. ...

This is a national disgrace. Congress should pass Castor’s measure, and President Obama should sign it into law.

Pomeroy Is Listening

From the Bismark Tribune:

Rep. Earl Pomeroy, D-N.D. [the chairman of the House Social Security Subcommittee], met with local Social Security Administration officials to talk about the future of the program.

Pomeroy’s subcommittee on Social Security is hosting a meeting on the subject this week, and the congressman has held a few such roundtables in North Dakota as preparation, part of what he calls a listening tour. ...

Facing the Social Security Administration are major staffing problems, where the force is decreasing as the pool of claimants is getting larger. Pomeroy said he’s heard from a number of staffers that retirees are not being replaced fast enough to meet customer service demands and that phones at the office are constantly busy because there just aren’t enough people to answer them. ...

He blames the inability to fund more Social Security jobs on cuts from Congress during the Bush administration, but said that an announcement by the Social Security commissioner that the agency would add 900 new jobs can at least partially be attributed to pressure from his committee.

And there is a related story on local television.

How Underfunding Social Security's Administrative Budget Costs Money -- Lots Of Money

From a recent report by Social Security's Office of Inspector General (OIG) (emphasis added):

The objective of this evaluation was to determine the financial impact to the Disability Insurance (DI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) programs as a result of conducting fewer full medical continuing disability reviews (CDR). ...

SSA employs a profiling system that uses data from SSA’s records to determine the likelihood of medical improvement for disabled beneficiaries. SSA selects beneficiaries’ records profiled as having a high likelihood of medical improvement for a full medical review by disability determination services (DDS). Beneficiaries profiled as having a medium or low likelihood of medical improvement are sent a mailer questionnaire. If the completed mailer questionnaire indicates medical improvement, SSA will send the case to the DDS for a full medical review. ...

According to SSA, resource limitations and increases in its core workloads prevented it from conducting full medical CDRs when they became due. As a result, SSA estimates a backlog of over 1.5 million full medical CDRs will exist at the end of Fiscal Year (FY) 2010.

SSA has made, and will continue to make, benefit payments to individuals who would no longer be eligible if the backlog of 1.5 million full medical CDRs had been conducted when they became due.

• From Calendar Year (CY) 2005 through CY 2010, we estimate SSA will have made benefit payments of between $1.3 and $2.6 billion that could have potentially been avoided if the full medical CDRs in the backlog had been conducted when they became due (see Appendix C).

• Although SSA plans to conduct an increased number of full medical CDRs in FY 2011, the 1.5-million full medical CDR backlog will most likely remain. Therefore, we estimate SSA will pay between $556 million and $1.1 billion during CY 2011 that could have potentially been avoided if the full medical CDRs in the backlog had been conducted when they became due (see Appendix C). ...

We estimate SSA could potentially identify lifetime Federal benefit savings of almost $15.8 billion if it had the resources to conduct all 1.5 million full medical CDRs in FY 2010.

Budget planners, take notice.

Why was it that OIG was not producing reports like this while George W. Bush was President? What we saw then was reports that implied that incompetent bureaucrats were allowing crooks to rip off Social Security.

Hearing Scheduled On Social Security Appropriation

The House Appropriations Committee's Labor-HHS Subcommittee has scheduled a hearing for Wednesday, April 14 at 10:00 on Social Security's administrative appropriation for fiscal year 2011, which begins on October 1, 2010. This is not an appropriation for the benefits paid by Social Security -- those require no appropriation -- but for the budget, or limitation on administrative expenditures (LAE) if you want to be technical, which Social Security needs to administer those benefits. Social Security Commissioner Michael Astrue is scheduled to testify.