Andrew Saul's Hold On Office Looking Even More Tenuous

      From the Supreme Court's opinion today in Collins v. Yellen:

... But the nature and breadth of an agency’s authority is not dispositive in determining whether Congress may limit the President’s power to remove its head. The President’s removal power serves vital purposes even when the officer subject to removal is not the head of one of the largest and most powerful agencies. The removal power helps the President maintain a degree of control over the subordinates he needs to carry out his duties as the head of the Executive Branch, and it works to ensure that these subordinates serve the people effectively and in accordance with the policies that the people presumably elected the President to promote. ...  

Courts are not well-suited to weigh the relative im-portance of the regulatory and enforcement authority of dis-parate agencies, and we do not think that the constitution-ality of removal restrictions hinges on such an inquiry.

 And from a footnote:

Amicus points to the Social Security Administration, the Office of Special Counsel, the Comptroller, “multi-member agencies for which the chair is nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to a fixed term,” and the Civil Service. ... None of these agencies is before us, and we do not comment on the constitutionality of any removal restriction that applies to their officers.

     And from the concurrence of Justice Kagan:

... Without even mentioning Seila Law’s “significant executive power” framing, the majority announces that, actually, “the constitutionality of removal restrictions” does  not “hinge[]” on “the nature and breadth of an agency’s authority.” ... Any “agency led by a single Director,” no matter how much executive power it wields, now becomes subject to the requirement of at-will removal. ... And the majority’s broadening is gratuitous—unnecessary to resolve the dispute here....

    And from the concurrence of Justices Sotomayor and Breyer:

 Never before, however, has the Court forbidden simple for-cause tenure protection for an Executive Branch officer who neither exercises significant executive power nor regulates the affairs of private parties.

     I thought it was already clear that the President's inability to remove the Commissioner at will was unconstitutional. I think it's now quite clear where the Supreme Court is headed or, should I say, has gone. I see no reason why the President should tolerate Saul any longer. Any attempt he makes to stay in office isn't going to work.

Book Forthcoming On Labor Market And Socal Security Disability Determination

      From a notice of a book forthcoming in September:

... In Social Security Disability Law and the American Labor Market, Jon C. Dubin challenges the contemporary policies for determining disability benefits and work assessment. He posits the fundamental questions: where are the jobs for persons with significant medical and vocational challenges? And how does the administration misfire in its standards and processes for answering that question? Deploying his profound understanding of the Social Security Administration and Disability law and policy, he demystifies the system, showing us its complex inner mechanisms and flaws, its history and evolution, and how changes in the labor market have rendered some agency processes obsolete. Dubin lays out how those who advocate eviscerating program coverage and needed life support benefits in the guise of modernizing these procedures would reduce the capacity for the Social Security Administration to function properly and serve its intended beneficiaries, and argues that the disability system should instead be “mended, not ended.” 

Dubin argues that while it may seem counterintuitive, the transformation from an industrial economy to a twenty-first-century service economy in the information age, with increased automation, and resulting diminished demand for arduous physical labor, has not meaningfully reduced the relevance of, or need for, the disability benefits programs. Indeed, they have created new and different obstacles to work adjustments based on the need for other skills and capacities in the new economy—especially for the significant portion of persons with cognitive, psychiatric, neuro-psychological, or other mental impairments. Therefore, while the disability program is in dire need of empirically supported updating and measures to remedy identified deficiencies, obsolescence, inconsistencies in application, and racial, economic and other inequities, the program’s framework is sufficiently broad and enduring to remain relevant and faithful to the Act’s congressional beneficent purposes and aspirations.

Electoral Fraud With A Social Security Twist

      There have been endless baseless complaints from former President Trump and other Republicans about alleged alleged electoral fraud by Democrats. It turns out that the only recent electoral fraud case of consequence was carried out on behalf of a Republican candidate -- and that it has a Social Security connection. From a press release:

A Bladenboro [NC] man pleaded guilty today to theft of government property and Social Security fraud.

According to court documents, Leslie McCrae Dowless, 65, defrauded the Social Security Administration by concealing his work and income while receiving monthly benefits payments.  In February 2013, Dowless applied for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits.  In the application, Dowless claimed that he was unable to work due to a disability.  Dowless received SSI benefits until July 2018, when he applied for Retirement Insurance Benefits (RIB).  In his application for RIB, Dowless stated that he did not expect to work in 2018 and had not worked in the two years preceding his application.  Dowless received RIB benefits through November 2018. Dowless was required to report certain events to the Social Security Administration, including changes in his work activity, income, or resources.

Unbeknownst to the Social Security Administration, Dowless worked as a consultant for at least two political campaigns during the 2018 Midterm Elections.  From March 2017 to November 2018, Dowless received at least 59 checks totaling $135,365.57 for consulting work. Dowless failed to report his work and income to the Social Security Administration. ...

     Political "consultant" is quite the euphemism. Dowless and confederates were collecting absentee ballots from unsuspecting voters and fraudulently signing them or even completing them. So many ballots were involved that both parties were in full agreement that the election was completely tainted and had to be revoted.

This Wasn't An Accident; All Of It Is Routine

      From KMOV in St. Louis:

A bizarre letter from the Social Security Administration had one local man scratching his head. They claimed he owed them money from nearly 50 years ago.

"You were overpaid when you received benefits as a student," the letter Rick Wosmanski got said. "I owed a total of 122.80 and I thought this is unusual .. It was 48 years ago. Give me a break," Wosmanski said. "I have a hard time remembering 48 hours ago." ...

"I was 19 years old!" Wosmanski said. He was 17 when his dad passed away and Wosmanski was entitled to his father's social security survivor's benefits. When he was no longer a full-time student, the Social Security Administration says he wasn't eligible anymore to get the money.

Trouble is, he doesn't ever remember getting paid and thinks his mom might have cashed the checks instead. "The rest is a mystery. Went to the grave with my mom," Wosmanski said. 

And now out of the blue, this letter. Even a phone call to the Social Security Administration and still they insisted he owed them money for a check he shouldn't have received.

"I said 'is there some kind of statute of limitations on this' and she said 'no, you owe us the money.' Just like that," Wosmanski said. ...

One quick email from News 4 to the government and sure enough, a change of heart. A spokesperson told us they couldn't comment on Wosmanski's situation specifically, but said "based on the information on our records, it appears we will be able to resolve this issue," saying someone would be reaching out to Wosmanski directly. ...

     This isn't some odd mistake. Trying to collect ancient overpayments is routine for Social Security. Trying to collect overpayments when there's no proof of an overpayment is routine. Immediately solving the problem for one individual when the news media asks about it is routine. This is all routine!

Why The Concentration On CDRs When Basic Service Is Suffering?

      From David Weaver, writing for The Hill:

The Biden administration recently released its first official budget plan, which recommends a 9.7 percent increase in the administrative budget of the Social Security Administration (SSA). This increase in top-line funding would partially reverse the chronic underfunding of the agency by Congress (SSA's core operating budget, adjusted for inflation, fell 13 percent from 2010 to 2021, while the number of beneficiaries SSA serves grew by 22 percent). However, problems with SSA's administrative funding go beyond insufficient funding of top-line numbers.

Increasingly, Congress has directed funding away from service delivery to disability reviews that remove individuals from the rolls based on SSA's assessment of medical improvement. ...

SSA plans to increase the number of full medical disability reviews next year by 36 percent and increase the number of Supplemental Security Income (SSI) redeterminations by 23 percent. ...

SSA plans to accelerate disability reviews next year so the agency can rapidly get back to being "current" on conducting the maximum number of reviews allowed by regulations. However, the agency shows no similar urgency on being "current" on other program integrity workloads. ...

Congress needs to pause increases in disability reviews and redeterminations until it can study — and possibly reform — the administrative process. That will also have the beneficial effect of allowing SSA to focus on service delivery as it begins to find its footing following the pandemic.

Why Is Social Security Still Using The DOT?

     From WBTV in Charlotte:

A WBTV Investigation into social security shows thousands of people are denied disability claims every year because of jobs that are out-of-date.

The Social Security Administration uses a guide called the Dictionary of Occupational Titles that hasn’t been updated since 1991, even as technological advancements have made many of the jobs described in the book obsolete.

The impact that it’s had can be felt by people like Gray Hogan. ...

Hogan applied for disability. He’s been unable to work a forty-hour week for years because of the pain.

But Hogan was denied twice. When social security denies a claimant, the person can often file an appeal in court with an administrative law judge. That process has numerous steps and the last one is for social security to determine if there are any jobs a claimant could work. That’s when Hogan was told there were jobs that were suited for him. But none of them were from the 21st Century.

“Document preparer, addresser and (envelope) stuffer,” Hogan said.

“Common sense would tell you that job doesn’t exist as it’s described,” attorney George Piemonte told WBTV. ...

“Over the millions of claims that they’re reviewing, you’re still talking about hundreds of thousands of people being denied based on these nonexistent jobs,” Piemonte said. ...

Work Without Worry Act

      From a press release:

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Senator Bill Cassidy, R-La., today introduced legislation to remove a Social Security work disincentive for Americans with disabilities. The Work Without Worry Act would allow Americans with disabilities to work to their full potential without causing them to lose out on higher Social Security benefits. ...

If an adult has a severe medical condition that began before age 22, they may be eligible for a Social Security benefit called the Disabled Adult Child (DAC) benefit. Their benefits are based on their parent’s Social Security earnings, in the same way that benefits of a child under age 18 would be. However, under current law some of these young adults fear that if they try to work they will lose future DAC benefits, which are often higher than any benefit they may qualify on their own. This fear inhibits the ability of Americans with disabilities to explore their ability to work as they transition to adult life.

The Work Without Worry Act promotes financial security by ensuring that any earnings from work – no matter how much – will not prevent an individual from receiving a Social Security DAC benefit from their parent’s work history if they have an eligible medical condition that began before age 22. This bill treats all individuals with severe medical conditions that began before age 22 the same – no matter when their parents claim Social Security benefits. This change is estimated to increase Social Security benefits by $100 million and improve the lives of nearly 2,000 individuals with disabilities over the next 10 years.

Additional original co-sponsors include Senators Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., Bernie Sanders, D-Vt., Pat Leahy, D-Vt., Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., and Bob Casey, D-Pa. The House of Representatives introduced a companion bill today, led by Congressman John Larson, D-Conn.

     Why don't we get rid of the marriage penalty for DAC recipients while we're at it.

News Coverage For House Social Security Subcommittee Hearing

      There's been little attention paid to the hearing held this week by the House Social Security Subcommittee. Here's one news article, however. Unless the Senate does something about the filibuster, it's impossible for any legislation of consequence to pass.

Normal Phone Service At Social Security

      Social Security says it's not answering its phones today because of the Juneteenth holiday. I guess that makes it about the same as any ordinary workday.

GAO Report On ALJ Productivity Expectations

 

      From Process Needed to Review Productivity Expectations for Administrative Law Judges by the Government Accountability Office (GAO):

The Social Security Administration’s (SSA) administrative law judges review, process, and adjudicate requests for hearings on disability benefits. In 2007, the agency set an expectation—which SSA reported was based on trend data and some regional managers’ input—for judges to issue 500-700 dispositions(decisions and dismissals) each year, and the extent to which they have met this expectation has varied over time. SSA did not document the expectation-setting process in 2007, nor has it formally reviewed the expectation since. Judges in discussion groups held by GAO questioned the basis of the expectation and 87 percent of judges GAO surveyed (47 of 54) said the expectation was too high. ...  

Judges in selected hearing offices cited a variety of factors affecting their ability to meet the annual expectation. The top factor cited by judges GAO surveyed was the size of case files, which have increased five-fold on average since the expectation was established, according to SSA data. ...  

SSA monitors judges’ productivity and takes various actions when expectations are not met, ranging from informal conversations to formal discipline. In addition, judges in 11 of 13 discussion groups viewed telework restrictions as a consequence for not meeting expectations. Additionally, judges GAO surveyed reported feeling pressured to meet the expectations. For instance, 87 percent ofjudges surveyed (47 of 54) said that SSA placed too much emphasis on productivity, and some expressed concerns about their work quality and work-life balance. SSA officials said they do not formally seek feedback from judges onthe expectations. However, without feedback or other gauges of pressure, SSA lacks information that could help it appropriately balance timely case processing while maintaining high-quality work and employee morale. ...

      Social Security cannot continue to ignore the dramatic changes in disability claim files nor can they continue to blindly pressure ALJs to do the impossible.

     It's not just ALJs who are affected by the dramatic increase in the size of Social Security disability claim files. It's also the attorneys who represent the claimants. We not only have to read all those records but we have to obtain many of them. And we have to do this at a time when our fees have been effectively cut by the failure to increase the fee cap. If there is a dramatic increase in the number of Social Security disability claims filed next year, as seems likely, I'm not at all sure that there will be attorneys available to represent them. The pandemic plus the effective decrease in attorney fees have left Social Security attorneys in a seriously weakened financial position and unlikely to increase their staffing.