Steven Thomma of the McClatchy newspaper chain reports on the political cost to Republicans of President Bush's proposal to privatize Social Security. Several Republican congressional candidates are in deep trouble because they touched the "third rail of American politics." Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, Representative Deborah Pryce of Ohio, Representative Clay Shaw of Florida (former chairman of the House Social Security Subcommittee) and Rick O'Donnell of Colorado are all facing uphill election battles because of Social Security.
Oct 10, 2006
Overpayments Of Attorney Fees
Social Security's Office of Inspector General (OIG) has issued a report on overpayments of attorney fees by SSA. The report concludes that:
OIG also found that over one third of the time the attorney did not return the excess fee, although I would wonder how long OIG gave for repayments to come back and be recorded. It can take some time after an attorney returns an excess fee before Social Security's records show this. I have been billed for overpayments long after I returned the money. Also, there are some attorneys who wait to repay money until they receive a bill from Social Security.
During Calendar Years (CY) 2003 and 2004, we estimate SSA issued 594 improper payments to attorneys totaling approximately $2.2 million. While this represented a small portion of the approximately 458,000 attorney payments issued during this period, additional controls could have prevented these improper payments. For example, SSA staff had the ability to bypass system warnings and process payments without indicating the reason for the override or obtaining supervisory approval. We also found the Agency improperly recorded the processing fees collected from each attorney payment. As a result, collected fees associated with the attorney payments may be overstated.From my experience, I would have to say that this is almost certainly an understatement of the problem.
OIG also found that over one third of the time the attorney did not return the excess fee, although I would wonder how long OIG gave for repayments to come back and be recorded. It can take some time after an attorney returns an excess fee before Social Security's records show this. I have been billed for overpayments long after I returned the money. Also, there are some attorneys who wait to repay money until they receive a bill from Social Security.
Oct 9, 2006
Using The Confirmation Process
A little history may help us see the direction the confirmation process will take for Michael Astrue, President Bush's nominee to become Commissioner of Social Security.
The fee agreement process, the most common way in which attorneys receive fees for representing Social Security claimants, was passed by Congress in 1990. The maximum fee was capped at $4,000 at that time. The law allows, but does not require, the Commissioner of Social Security to adjust the cap for inflation since January 1, 1991. The cap has been adjusted only one time to $5,300, shortly after Jo Anne Barnhart was confirmed as Commissioner of Social Security. If the cap were adjusted now for inflation, it would be $6,059.60, through August, the last month for which inflation figures are available, according to InflationData.com.
What happened to persuade Jo Anne Barnhart to adjust the fee cap at the beginning of her term in office, but not again, despite 15% inflation since? Could it have had something to do with her confirmation as Commissioner? The matter did not come up during Barnhart's confirmation hearing. However, the Senate confirmation process is more than just the public hearing. There are also private meetings between a nominee and members of the Senate committee having jurisdiction over the nomination. A nominee to an executive branch position may be asked to make commitments either during the public hearing or during the private interviews. Members of the public and interest groups may ask Senators to request that a nominee make commitments about what they will do if confirmed. Did Barnhart's increase in the attorney fee cap come because of a private commitment she made during the confirmation process? Probably.
Michael Astrue, President Bush's nominee for Commissioner of Social Security, is almost certain to be asked to commit to an adjustment in the fee cap. Indeed, Astrue may be asked to commit to making annual adjustments in the fee cap. But attorney fees will only be a small part of what will be asked of Astrue. Regardless of who controls the Senate after the November election, Michael Astrue has little chance of being confirmed unless he makes important commitments to Democratic senators. Democrats have every reason to block a Republican nominee whose term in office will continue for four years after the current president leaves office, especially when that person is being nominated to head an agency as beloved by Democrats as the Social Security Administration and when he is nominated by a president as despised and mistrusted by Democratic senators as President Bush.
The threat of a filibuster can prevent Astrue from being confirmed, even if Democrats fail to gain a majority in the Senate. Democrats can easily find political cover for a filibuster. During the confirmation hearing they can demand that Astrue answer questions about his views of President Bush's privatization plan. Astrue probably supports privatization, but even if he opposes it, he is unlikely to bite the hand that nominated him by openly criticizing the President's plan. Democrats can threaten to filibuster Astrue because of his views on privatization. Few Republican senators would want to force that issue and they would need 60 votes to break a filibuster if they did. Either Astrue makes the promises that Democratic senators want him to make or he cannot be confirmed.
A recess appointment for Astrue is still possible, if Republicans control the Senate after the election. (A recess appointment is unlikely if the Democrats control the Senate after the election, since they will probably arrange to keep the Senate technically in continuous session to prevent recess appointments. Michael Astrue may not be that important, but John Bolton is.) However, a recess appointment only lasts until the end of the Congress, which would only keep Astrue in office until January 2009. A recess appointee might also have a more difficult time dealing with Congress. If the House Social Security Subcommittee is controlled by Democrats after the election, as now seems likely, Astrue's life as a recess appointee could be difficult.
Michael Astrue has personal reasons to make whatever promises are necessary to get the job. He was proposed previously by President Bush for Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, but never formally nominated because of Senate opposition. Does he want to fail again in an effort to obtain high government office? A look at Astrue's resume shows why he might be highly motivated to do what is needed to get confirmed. He had a spectacularly successful stint in government service during the Reagan and George H. W. Bush administrations. His career since, while not unsuccessful, has not been all that one might expect from someone who showed as much early promise as Michael Astrue. Also, he is jut about unemployed at the moment.
So what might sort of commitments might be asked of Astrue? Let me list a few that Democratic senators on the Finance Committee may request:
The fee agreement process, the most common way in which attorneys receive fees for representing Social Security claimants, was passed by Congress in 1990. The maximum fee was capped at $4,000 at that time. The law allows, but does not require, the Commissioner of Social Security to adjust the cap for inflation since January 1, 1991. The cap has been adjusted only one time to $5,300, shortly after Jo Anne Barnhart was confirmed as Commissioner of Social Security. If the cap were adjusted now for inflation, it would be $6,059.60, through August, the last month for which inflation figures are available, according to InflationData.com.
What happened to persuade Jo Anne Barnhart to adjust the fee cap at the beginning of her term in office, but not again, despite 15% inflation since? Could it have had something to do with her confirmation as Commissioner? The matter did not come up during Barnhart's confirmation hearing. However, the Senate confirmation process is more than just the public hearing. There are also private meetings between a nominee and members of the Senate committee having jurisdiction over the nomination. A nominee to an executive branch position may be asked to make commitments either during the public hearing or during the private interviews. Members of the public and interest groups may ask Senators to request that a nominee make commitments about what they will do if confirmed. Did Barnhart's increase in the attorney fee cap come because of a private commitment she made during the confirmation process? Probably.
Michael Astrue, President Bush's nominee for Commissioner of Social Security, is almost certain to be asked to commit to an adjustment in the fee cap. Indeed, Astrue may be asked to commit to making annual adjustments in the fee cap. But attorney fees will only be a small part of what will be asked of Astrue. Regardless of who controls the Senate after the November election, Michael Astrue has little chance of being confirmed unless he makes important commitments to Democratic senators. Democrats have every reason to block a Republican nominee whose term in office will continue for four years after the current president leaves office, especially when that person is being nominated to head an agency as beloved by Democrats as the Social Security Administration and when he is nominated by a president as despised and mistrusted by Democratic senators as President Bush.
The threat of a filibuster can prevent Astrue from being confirmed, even if Democrats fail to gain a majority in the Senate. Democrats can easily find political cover for a filibuster. During the confirmation hearing they can demand that Astrue answer questions about his views of President Bush's privatization plan. Astrue probably supports privatization, but even if he opposes it, he is unlikely to bite the hand that nominated him by openly criticizing the President's plan. Democrats can threaten to filibuster Astrue because of his views on privatization. Few Republican senators would want to force that issue and they would need 60 votes to break a filibuster if they did. Either Astrue makes the promises that Democratic senators want him to make or he cannot be confirmed.
A recess appointment for Astrue is still possible, if Republicans control the Senate after the election. (A recess appointment is unlikely if the Democrats control the Senate after the election, since they will probably arrange to keep the Senate technically in continuous session to prevent recess appointments. Michael Astrue may not be that important, but John Bolton is.) However, a recess appointment only lasts until the end of the Congress, which would only keep Astrue in office until January 2009. A recess appointee might also have a more difficult time dealing with Congress. If the House Social Security Subcommittee is controlled by Democrats after the election, as now seems likely, Astrue's life as a recess appointee could be difficult.
Michael Astrue has personal reasons to make whatever promises are necessary to get the job. He was proposed previously by President Bush for Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, but never formally nominated because of Senate opposition. Does he want to fail again in an effort to obtain high government office? A look at Astrue's resume shows why he might be highly motivated to do what is needed to get confirmed. He had a spectacularly successful stint in government service during the Reagan and George H. W. Bush administrations. His career since, while not unsuccessful, has not been all that one might expect from someone who showed as much early promise as Michael Astrue. Also, he is jut about unemployed at the moment.
So what might sort of commitments might be asked of Astrue? Let me list a few that Democratic senators on the Finance Committee may request:
- Keep the Social Security Administration out of politics, including any renewed effort at privatization or other "reform" of Social Security. Senator Max Baucus, the senior Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee and the likely chairman of the Committee if Democrats gain control of the Senate, has already signaled his intention of insisting upon this, saying that the public does not support privatization and that Astrue "should commit to maintaining the critical role that the Social Security program currently plays in providing income security for retirees, disabled workers, survivors, and their families." Baucus Comments On Social Security Nominee. If Democrats control either house of Congress after November, this should be an easy one to agree to, since even President Bush will have to understand that there will be no hope of enacting his plan if Democrats control either house of Congress.
- Officially withdraw the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would increase the age requirements of the grid regulations. This one may not be difficult for Astrue to commit to. Apparently, this proposal did not arise out of policy considerations. It was merely a means of saving money. It certainly was not Astrue's idea.
- Do something NOW about the backlog of pending requests for hearings at Social Security. What specifically can Senators ask for? We know that the senior attorney program, under which certain agency attorneys are authorized to approve certain claims of those awaiting a hearing, under certain circumstances, worked in the past to reduce a backlog. We also know that "re-recon" worked. "Re-recon" is a process for diverting new requests for hearing to what amounts to a new reconsideration review, through which some will be approved. Pledges of even more dramatic action, such as the appointment of temporary administrative law judges, as was done when there were bad backlogs after the introduction of the SSI program, could be demanded. Again, Senator Baucus has signaled that he wants a commitment to some action on the backlogs, saying that Astrue "will also need a plan to speed and improve service to the public, particularly those applying for disability benefits." The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) might not like this one, but many Republican senators would support doing something on an urgent basis.
- Speak publicly about Social Security's budget problems. Even though she must have done so privately, Jo Anne Barnhart never criticized the Social Security budget proposed by the President and barely raised a peep about the lower budgets that were passed by Congress. Even with her agency facing staff furloughs next year she has been unable to bring herself to issue a press release on Social Security's budget problems. Democratic senators may demand that the next Commissioner release publically his own budget proposal showing what he feels is needed to provide adequate public service. OMB would certainly oppose this, since it would mean that the Social Security Administration would become a truly independent agency, but even some Republican senators might like to see a truly independent Social Security Commissioner.
Oct 8, 2006
Attorney Fee Payments For September
Social Security has released the September statistics on payments of fees to attorneys and others eligible for direct payment of fees for representing Social Security claimants. Payments were up 16% in September over August 2006 and up 30% over August 2005.
Fee Payments | ||
|---|---|---|
| Month/Year | Volume | Amount |
| Jan-06 | 18,752 | $64,848,326.02 |
| Feb-06 | 20,426 | $70,312.586.15 |
| Mar-06 | 26,227 | $91,045,934.83 |
| Apr-06 | 23,042 | $79,714,961.76 |
| May-06 | 23,581 | $82,015,869.29 |
| June-06 | 27,771 | $97,085,724.60 |
| July-06 | 21,432 | $74,648,883.83 |
| August-06 | 24,579 | $85,528,548.61 |
Sept-06 | 28,968 | $99,124,616.47 |
| Fee payments also include payments made to eligible non-attorneys participating in the demonstration project authorized by section 303 of the Social Security Protection Act of 2004 (Pub. L. 108-203). | ||
Oct 7, 2006
"Disability Summit" Deadline Extended
There is a report that the deadline to apply to attend the "Disability Summit" sponsored by the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Advisory Panel has been extended to October 13.
Oct 6, 2006
Sign Up For E-Mail Notification Of Attorney Fee Direct Deposits
With direct deposit of attorney fee scoming up soon, attorneys who represent Social Security claimants need to sign up for the Treasury Department's PAID system which gives e-mail notification of direct deposits from the federal government. The PAID system is already useful for EAJA direct deposits and will soon be essential for regular attorney fee direct deposits.
Oct 5, 2006
Beneficiary "Summit"
The Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Advisory Panel has scheduled a "beneficiary summit" for February 6 and 7 in Atlanta. The deadline to request to participate is October 6. The address to send an application to participate is , although one might also complain to them that they have done virtually nothing to publicize this. Apparently information about this "summit" was given only to a select group and not everyone who wants to attend this "summit" can attend. You have to be "selected" to attend. They may be paying travel expenses.
This sounds like a stage-managed event designed to make Ticket to Work look like something that it is not -- a success. It also sounds rather expensive.
This sounds like a stage-managed event designed to make Ticket to Work look like something that it is not -- a success. It also sounds rather expensive.
NADR Announces Albuquerque Conference
The National Association of Disability Representatives (NADR) has announced its annual conference to be held in Albuquerque from March 25-28, 2007.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)