What Are AARP's Values?

From a 2005 Businessweek article:

In Washington, an entity's power can be measured by the vehemence of the attacks it draws. By that standard, AARP may be outmuscled only by the White House in the slugfest over restructuring Social Security. ...

AARP's role in the Social Security debate has focused new attention on the hundreds of millions of dollars the group makes by endorsing and co-branding health insurance, financial products, and travel services that are sold to its members. ...

Just as important is the question of whether a group that makes millions selling financial services to its members is quite as impartial a player in the debate over private accounts as it would appear. ...

[I]t is equally clear that AARP makes a substantial sum of money from its partners' sales of mutual funds and other investment products to members. That raises the appearance of a potential conflict of interest. Whatever version of reform passes -- whether Bush's accounts carved out from payroll taxes, or the "add-on" accounts that many liberals favor to encourage retirement savings -- the overhaul is likely to create new markets and opportunities ...

AARP officials reject the criticisms. The organization's marketing "does not in any way influence AARP's public policy positions," says Dawn M. Sweeney, president of AARP Services Inc., the for-profit subsidiary that manages AARP's co-branding deals. ...

Still, the scale of AARP's commercial activities is enormous. The nonprofit is one of the nation's most aggressive in selling its name to marketers of financial and travel products. In 2003, the latest year for which financial reports are available, AARP collected $300 million -- or 39% of its $770 million in revenue -- by co-branding ...

If critics have focused on its policy role, AARP has received less scrutiny for the quality of its products. Many of the funds and insurance policies that AARP markets provide considerably less benefit than seniors could get on their own, a BusinessWeek analysis reveals. ...

Ought To Be Held Sacrosanct

From the Associated Press:

Social Security taxes "ought to be held sacrosanct," said Rep. Earl Pomeroy, D-N.D., chairman of the House Ways and Means subcommittee on Social Security.

"When you start to signal that the (Social Security) tax levels are negotiable, you end up in long-term trouble, I think, in terms of making absolutely certain that the entitlement funding streams are secure," Pomeroy said. ...

"This 2 percent payroll tax cut is the beginning of the end of Social Security as we know it," said the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, which is led by former Rep. Barbara B. Kennelly, D-Conn. "Worker contributions have successfully funded the program for 75 years and that critical linkage between contributions and benefits is what keeps Social Security a self-funded program."

Et Tu, Brute?

From Sam Stein writing at Huffington Post:

The country's foremost senior-issues advocacy organization on Friday night lent its support to a critical provision of the president's tax cut deal with Republicans.

In what could prove to be a consequential assessment of "the framework," AARP's Executive Vice President John Rother says that both he and his organization have determined that a two percentage point reduction in the payroll tax rate (from which Social Security gets its revenue) would not endanger the solvency of their community's cherished program.

"Benefits Denied" Isn't Enough

From Spiva v. Astrue (7th Cir. December 6, 2010)

The government implies that if the administrative law judge’s opinion consisted of two words—“benefits denied”—a persuasive brief could substitute for the missing opinion. That is incorrect. It would displace the responsibility that Congress has delegated to the Social Security Administration—the responsibility not merely to gesture thumbs up or thumbs down but to articulate reasoned grounds of decision based on legislative policy and administrative regulation—into the Justice Department, which represents the agency in the courts.

Update: Just to clarify: The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) decision did not consist merely of two words. The Court of Appeals found the ALJ's rationale sorely lacking and held that Social Security could not defend the decision by telling the Court what rationale the ALJ could have used. The Court held that the ALJ decision must be judged upon what it said, not upon what it might have said.

VA Watchdog Reopens

I reported earlier that the VA Watchdog website had stopped adding new material because of the illness of its founder, Larry Scott. I am happy to report that Jim Strickland has picked up the torch and VA Watchdog Today has opened as a successor to Larry Scott's website.

Makes No Sense On Its Face

From an op ed piece in the New York Times by Peter Orszag, former director of the Office of Management and Budget in the Obama Administration:

One of the gravest dangers posed by the weak economy is that the unemployed will become discouraged and give up looking for work, perhaps permanently as their skills atrophy. ...

Unfortunately, at this point more than six million people have been unemployed for six months or longer. More than one million have already given up looking for work because they believe no job is available. And a drastic rise in applications for disability insurance suggests we may be headed for more long-lasting trouble. ...

The spike in disability insurance applications (and awards) does not reflect a less healthy population. ... [T]he weak labor market has driven more people to apply for disability benefits that they qualify for but wouldn’t need if they could find work....

Today, however, many people with disabilities are able to engage in some form of work — even if they can’t admit that and still keep their insurance benefits.

Orzag's solution for this problem: pass the President's "economic stimulus" package of tax cuts and extend unemployment insurance.

Orzag takes a job with Citibank next month.

Preliminary Design For Metro West Replacement

From the Baltimore Sun:

The winner of a national competition to build an office campus for the Social Security Administration unveiled a preliminary design for the project Thursday at a meeting of Baltimore's Urban Design and Architecture Review Panel.

The $200 million office campus, which will house 1,600 SSA employees in Northwest Baltimore, will be anchored by two office buildings — one five stories, the other seven stories — connected by a large glass atrium.

One of the largest and most costly projects planned for Baltimore, the campus will also include a six-story garage, cafeteria, fitness center, day care center and parking spaces for 80 bicycles. Each office building will have a "green" roof, and most employee workstations will be less than 50 feet from a window.

Planned for 11.3 acres near the Reisterstown Road Plaza Metro Station, the 538,000-square-foot project will replace the 30-year-old Metro West complex on Greene Street near downtown Baltimore.

Demonstration Outside Social Security Central Offices

From WBAL in Baltimore:

Employees frustrated with the federal government took their concerns to the Social Security building in Baltimore County on Friday, voicing anger about a possible freeze on federal pay and changes in Social Security.

WBAL-TV 11's Rob Roblin reported that the workers showed up in the snow at Social Security Administration headquarters in Woodlawn to let the government know that they want hands off Social Security.

"Hands off. the changes that they're proposing for Social Security (are) not good for anybody," said John Gage, national president of the American Federation of Government Employees. ...

U.S. Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-District 7, said he appeared at the gathering to show his support for federal workers, saying he opposes the proposed Social Security changes.

Camp To Be Ways And Means Chairman

Republicans in the House of Representatives have selected Dave Camp of Michigan to be the Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee in the new Congress.

Camp believes in fairy tales. From his website:

I support voluntary personal accounts for younger workers that would allow them to build a nest egg for retirement that they would own and control, and could pass on to their families. This will permanently strengthen Social Security, without changing benefits for those now in or near retirement, and without raising payroll taxes on workers. Inheritance rights in personal accounts would especially help widows who depend on Social Security and eliminate the need for cumbersome regulations that too often deny individuals from receiving their benefits in a timely fashion.

The truth is that if you divert money that would have gone into the Social Security trust funds into private accounts within only a few years you run out of money to pay current beneficiaries. But what difference does that make? Republicans have always regarded the Social Security trust funds as a fiction and Democrats are rapidly losing faith in their most basic convictions. Divert the entire FICA into private accounts, pay current benefits by borrowing money. Over a few decades Social Security disappears. It will only cost a few trillion dollars and destroy all retirement security but Wall Street will make even more obscene profits and Republicans will achieve the dream that they have had for the last 75 years. All Republicans may have to do is to threaten a default on our national debt.

ALJs Want More Security

From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch:

Mark Brown, a federal Social Security judge in St. Louis, recalls spending time in his courtroom with Russell Weston, the Southern Illinois man who later entered the U.S. Capitol and shot two police officers to death.

Brown cites the case to show that the nation's 1,400 Social Security judges can face potentially violent petitioners. He is pushing the federal government for more guards, better meeting rooms and other changes to improve the judges' safety. ...

Randall Frye, a Social Security judge in North Carolina and president of the association, said that besides additional guards, the biggest need was larger hearing rooms enabling more space between the judge and people pressing claims. He said that hearing rooms now averaged 300 square feet or less, about the size of a large bedroom.

Is Judge Brown giving the name of a claimant who appeared before him?