From an article by Jack Smalligan and Chantel Boyens of the Urban Institute in The Hill concerning Social Security overpayments and how to reduce them:
... [W]e proposed that the Social Security Administration adopt a prospective eligibility and certification process. Under this approach, the agency would review a beneficiary’s eligibility and benefit level periodically and certify the beneficiary’s benefit level for a fixed period of time. If a beneficiary’s income changed, their benefits would be revised when they were due for recertification — but the agency would not be able to claw back past payments. ...
This is not a radical proposal: It is how other safety net programs, such as SNAP, already work. This approach also aligns with the Social Security Administration’s own practice for redetermining benefits for disability beneficiaries when they experience a medical improvement that might decrease their need for benefits. ...
I suppose this would be nice but I don't know where the manpower for doing all those Title II redeterminations would come from. Well-meaning people such the authors of this piece cannot grasp the depth of the staffing crisis at Social Security.
The Social Security Subcommittee of the House Ways and Means Committee will hold a hearing at 2:00 this afternoon on Protecting Beneficiaries from the Harm of Improper Payments. Here's the witness list:
If your focus is on protecting beneficiaries, wouldn't you want to hear from an affected beneficiary? Instead they're calling in witnesses from Social Security's Office of Inspector General and the Government Accountability Office, agencies which have inaccurately conflated overpayments with fraud and which have favored unremitting efforts to recover overpayments. No, it looks like the focus will be on beating up on Kijakazi. I'm not sure that in general there's that much to beat up Kijakzi on anyway but blaming her for the overpayment issues is wrong. This mess has been brewing for decades.
The Senate Special Committee on Aging held a hearing yesterday on Securing Social Security: Accessing Payments and Preserving the Program for Future Generations. The hearing was held in Phoenixville, PA. Here's an excerpt from the testimony of Jessica LaPointe, President of American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO (AFGE) Council 220, the labor union that represents most Social Security employees. This chart shows employee attrition rates at selected Social Security field office in Pennsylvania:
A recently released report on operations at Social Security's Office of Hearings Operations (OHO):
 |
| Click on image to view full size |
Note that in Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 OHO had 283,134.40 overtime hours. In the recently concluded FY 2023 OHO had 458,437.69 overtime hours, an increase of 62%. That's extraordinary when you consider the needs of other part of the Social Security Administration. OHO is so much more visible to Congress than boring parts of Social Security such as the teleservice centers and payment centers.
.. We would like to express our general support for SSA’s efforts. For too long, there has been an unnecessary divide between SSI and SSDI claimants. SSDI claimants could complete their applications for benefits completely online, while SSI claimants were subjected to long wait times at Field Offices, or over the phone, to complete an application for benefits.
The process for applying for SSI is labyrinthine and confusing. Our members seeking SSI report often being met by well-meaning, but overworked employees prone to misunderstandings and mistakes. Further, SSI recipients are among the most at-risk members of society, and SSI benefits are often their families’ only source of cash available to pay for shelter and other necessities. ...
The proposed request indicates that third-party assisters may use iClaim to apply for an applicant. It also indicates that after a third-party assister completes the application, the applicant will be required to either physically sign the application, or verbally attest to its contents telephonically. However, if a claimant is using the online system to provide this information, it seems unnecessary to require either a wet signature or verbal attestation by an employee. In our experience, claimants are still having difficulty receiving mail, particularly in poorer areas. Further, requiring SSA employees to call claimants also adds an extra, unnecessary burden on employees. SSA should explore allowing claimants to sign their application at a later time and complete an e-signature. ...
The proposed request notes that “iClaim uses dynamic pathing, which ensures claimants are only asked to complete the questions that are relevant to them.” In principle, this seems to be a positive development. We commend SSA’s goal of ensuring the application process is streamlined as much as possible. That said, SSA should make public how the dynamic pathing process will work. ...
From WRDW in Augusta, GA:
The Richmond County Sheriff’s Office bomb squad and other officers were called to [the local Social Security field office]..
Once on scene, deputies were given a description of a man with a red jacket carrying a book bag.
The sheriff’s office identified Keyon Dickens, 38, of Blake Drive, as the suspect.
Deputies saw Dickens walking along the side of the building and ordered him to drop the book bag, the report states.
Officials say Dickens dropped the bag, was detained and walked over to the patrol vehicle.
According to the report from the sheriff’s office, deputies found a white paper towel on Dickens, that had “I have a bomb” written on it.
While the bomb squad responded, deputies say Dickens “requested if he was going to be on the news and that we should loosen his handcuffs so that he looks good for the news.” …
From WRDW/WAGT:
A suspect was taken into custody after a suspicious package was found at the Social Security Administration office [in Augusta, GA] on Tuesday, according to the Richmond County Sheriff’s Office. ...
By 1 p.m., the bomb squad had cleared a suspicious package and a suspect had been taken into custody, according to authorities. ...
Have you wondered about Social Security’s Fiscal Year 2024 appropriations situation? Wanted nonpartisan information? The Library of Congress’s Congressional Information has you covered in its recently released report Social Security Administration (SSA): FY2024 Annual Limitation on Administrative Expenses (LAE) Appropriation: In Brief. They explain why it’s technically not an appropriation but an LAE. What the report doesn’t say is that the situation for Social Security and almost all other federal agencies is a mess because the Republican majority in the House of Representatives is in complete disarray.
From Disability Insurance Income Saves Lives by Alexander Gelber, Timothy Moore, Zhuan Pei and Alexander Strand:
We show that higher payments from US Social Security Disability Insurance (DI) reduce mortality. Using administrative data on new DI beneficiaries, we exploit discontinuities in the benefit formula through a regression kink design. We estimate that $1,000 more in annual DI payments decreases the annual mortality rate of lower-income beneficiaries by approximately 0.18 to 0.35 percentage points, implying an elasticity of mortality with respect to DI income of around -0.6 to -1.0. We find no robust evidence of an effect of DI income on the mortality of higher-income beneficiaries. The mortality effects imply large welfare benefits of disability insurance.
The Social Security Administration has provided people with income security for over 80 years. The agency takes seriously its responsibilities to ensure eligible individuals receive the benefits to which they are entitled and to safeguard the integrity of benefit programs to better serve its customers. Agency employees work hard to pay the right person the right amount at the right time, and payment accuracy rates remain high.Social Security pays $1.4 trillion in benefits to more than 71 million people each year. While payment accuracy rates are high, overpayments do happen given the number of people the agency serves, the number of changes in their circumstances, and the complexity of the programs.
Only around 0.5 percent of Social Security payments are overpayments. For the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program, overpayments also represent a small percentage of payments—about 8 percent—but are higher due to the complexity in administering statutory income and resource limits and asset evaluations.
“Despite our high accuracy rates, I am putting together a team to review our overpayment policies and procedures to further improve how we serve our customers,” said Kilolo Kijakazi, Acting Commissioner of Social Security. “I have designated a senior official to work out of the Office of the Commissioner to lead the team and report directly to me.”
There is misinformation in the media claiming that the Social Security Administration is attempting to collect $21 billion. This figure was derived from the total amount of overpayments that have occurred over the history of the programs. Each person’s situation is unique, and the agency handles overpayments on a case-by-case basis. In particular, if a person doesn’t agree that they’ve been overpaid, or believes the amount is incorrect, they can appeal. If they believe they shouldn’t have to pay the money back, they can request that the agency waive collection of the overpayment. There’s no time limit for filing a waiver.
The agency is continually improving how it serves the millions of people who depend on its programs, including by preventing overpayments and making it easier to navigate the recovery and waiver processes.
For instance, the agency just released its streamlined waiver request form that is easier to understand and less burdensome for people to request a debt recovery waiver. It is also developing a new electronic payroll data exchange program that will automatically use wage information to adjust payment amounts when appropriate to prevent overpayments. Additionally, the agency intends to publish a proposed rule to streamline processes and reduce burden so eligible individuals can more easily seek debt relief.
When overpayments do happen, the agency is required by law to adjust benefits or recover debts. The law allows Social Security to waive recovery in some cases, which must be balanced with the agency’s stewardship responsibility to safeguard the integrity of benefit programs and the trust funds.
Social Security is committed to working with people if they seek to appeal or to explore potential repayment options and waivers when allowed by law.
For more information about the overpayment process, please see Overpayments Fact Sheet
The federal agency that oversees Social Security announced Wednesday that it will review the way it handles “overpayments” — money it sends beneficiaries that it later determines they weren’t entitled to receive.
The Social Security Administration made the announcement weeks after KFF Health News and Cox Media Group reported that the agency has been trying to reclaim billions of dollars from beneficiaries, including many poor, retired, and disabled people who have spent the money and are unable to repay it.
“Despite our high accuracy rates, I am putting together a team to review our overpayment policies and procedures to further improve how we serve our customers,” Kilolo Kijakazi, acting commissioner of Social Security, said in a news release.
Kijakazi said she had chosen a “senior official” to lead the team and report directly to her. …
This issue will certainly come up when there’s a confirmation hearing for Martin O’Malley’s nomination for Commissioner. I hope that’s coming up soon.
Social Security has released numbers showing the backlogs at the initial level on disability claims. This is from more than six months ago but I don't think there's been significant improvement since. The situation may be worse. The processing time is expressed in days. You can click on the images to view them full size.
From Marketwatch:
When Alan Greenspan and his committee supposedly “fixed” Social Security’s funding crisis in the early 1980s, the program was supposed to remain solvent well into the 2050s.
Instead, the trust fund is scheduled to run out of money in 2034 — decades ahead of schedule. What went wrong?
Stephen Goss, who has been the Social Security Administration’s chief actuary for more than 20 years, posed this question recently during a retirement conference hosted by the Harkin Institute. And his answer may surprise some people.
Sure, birthrates have collapsed from the heady days of the baby boom, he said, and that trend hasn’t helped. But it’s nothing new: The big fall started in 1965, nearly 20 years before the Greenspan Commission.
And yes, people are living longer than they used to. But that isn’t a surprise, he added —actually, the decline in mortality is pretty much in line with expectations. The forecasts have proven “remarkably accurate,” he said.
So what changed? In a word: inequality.
Goss argued that rising income inequality — with fast growth at the top and slow growth everywhere else — is the mystery ingredient that has thrown Social Security’s finances into turmoil earlier than planned. And the big change took place in the 17 years after the Greenspan Commission made its projection, from 1983 to 2000, he said.
During that time, incomes for the best-paid 6% of earners rose by 62% in real, inflation-adjusted terms, he said. For the other 94%, incomes rose by just 17%.
The net result was that the lion’s share of U.S. income growth was above the Social Security cap, and wasn’t subject to the program’s payroll taxes. The percentage of incomes subject to the program’s tax collapsed from around 90% in the early 1980s to barely 82% by the turn of the millennium. …
From Does Temporary Disability Insurance Reduce Older Workers’ Reliance On Social Security Disability Insurance? by Siyan Liu, Laura D. Quinby, and James Giles:
Temporary Disability Insurance (TDI) provides workers with wage replacement while they recover from a serious medical condition. Proponents of a national paid leave program argue that these benefits allow workers to adjust to health shocks and return to the workforce, reducing reliance on Social Security Disability Insurance (DI). Yet, TDI could also encourage DI application by providing income during the lengthy qualification period. This study uses the 1992-2020 Health and Retirement Study to evaluate how access to TDI benefits affects the likelihood that older workers end up on DI after a work-limiting health shock. Specifically, it compares the experience of workers in states with mandated TDI benefits to those living in states without such policies.
The paper found that:
TDI helps workers with severe impairments stay in the labor force.
Specifically, workers who develop severe disabilities are 26 percentage points more likely to be employed and 16 percentage points less likely to apply for DI when they have TDI benefits.
However, workers whose impairments do not qualify for DI may use TDI to facilitate early retirement. ...
 |
| Click on image to view full size |
I have serious problems with this study. First, the authors didn't realize that the generally used term isn't Temporary Disability Insurance but Short Term Disability which suggests that they didn't get very far into anything other than abstruse math, such as "𝑈𝑆=𝑈(𝑤𝑆(𝐻)+𝑦)+𝜑𝑆𝐻." Second, and far more important, the authors are comparing states like New York, California and Rhode Island with states like Iowa, Louisiana and Georgia. There are major demographic and economic differences between these states that likely explain most if not all the differences they're finding. You could easily produce a study demonstrating that disability claims are more common in areas where college football is highly popular but do you think that means that following college football causes disability claims?
In general, I'm highly, highly skeptical of those who think they can manipulate sick people into working longer. That might or might not be in their best interests but I don't think it's possible anyway. The factors that go into producing disability claims such as illness often combined with adverse vocational factors such as age and lack of work skills can't be manipulated out of the way. Even if you can get people back to work it's usually only postponing the inevitable by a few months.
From Yahoo Finance:
Many baby boomers across the country are now coming to terms with the hard reality that working for your entire adult life is no longer enough to guarantee you’ll have a roof over your head in your later years.
Thanks in part to a series of recessions, high housing costs and a shortage of affordable housing, older adults are now the fastest-growing segment of America’s homeless population, according to a report in the Wall Street Journal, based on data from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. ...
Now, the over-50 demographic represents half of the homeless single adults in the U.S. — with no sign of their numbers slowing, leaving baby boomers (those aged 57 to 75) particularly vulnerable.
“Elderly homelessness has been rare within the contemporary homeless problem. We’ve always had very few people over 60 who’ve been homeless historically,” Culhane from the University of Pennsylvania told PBS NewsHour. ...
I'm sure there are many reasons for this increase in homelessness among older people but the failures of Social Security's disability programs have to be a major factor. There are far, far too many disabled people in homeless shelters.
The Social Security Administration has issued new instructions in its POMS manual on transferability of skills for purposes of determining disability. The sections affected are:
At first glance I don't see anything that makes a difference but this is a sensitive enough subject that it bears a closer reading than I have given it to this point.
My longstanding opinion is that transferability of skills should only be found quite rarely. Those who really did have transferable skills almost certainly transferred them and didn't file disability claims.
From a notice that Social Security has scheduled for publication in the Federal Register:
We propose to revise the time period that we consider when determining whether an individual’s past work is relevant for purposes of making disability determinations and decisions. Specifically, we would revise the definition of past relevant work (PRW) by reducing the relevant work period from 15 to 5 years. This change would allow individuals to focus on the most current and relevant information about their past work, better reflect the current evidence base on changes over time in worker skill decay and job responsibilities, reduce processing time and improve customer service, and reduce burden on individuals.
This is overdue by about 40 years but better late than never. It never made sense to tell disability claimants that they are not disabled because they can return to jobs they last held 12 years ago. Work skills just don't stick with people that long.
