Some More From Yesterday's Hearing

Some excerpts from the prepared statement of Sylvester Schieder, Chairman of the Social Security Advisory Board (SSAB):

The number of hearings pending at the end of fiscal year 2006 showed an increase over the prior year from 708 thousand to 716 thousand, but that was far smaller than the 756 thousand projected at the start of the year. However, this was not because the agency processed more claims than it had expected to but rather because there were fewer appeals than expected. That sounds like good news, but at least part of the reduction in the number of new hearings cases is a reflection of the growing number of cases remaining undecided at the earlier, reconsideration stage.

There is another factor, unknown to Mr. Schieber, that I am pretty sure of, even though I have no statistics on it. There is a growing backlog of cases in which an appeal has been filed, but not yet logged into Social Security's computer system, because of staffing shortages at Social Security's field offices. This is a point referred to by Rick Warsinskey of NCSSMA whose statement for the record quotes from an e-mail he had received from a Social Security field office employee who complained, among other things, that his or her office could not "get to the appeals being mailed in."

Here is a table provided by Mr. Schieber, but even this downplays the funding problem, since Social Security was only asking for what it could conceivably get, not what it actually needed:

Social Security Administrative Funding (millions)
		President's
	SSA	Budget	Final
Fiscal Year	Request	Request	Appropriation
2000	$ 6,997.0	$ 6,706.0	$ 6,572.0
2001	$ 7,466.0	$ 7,134.0	$ 7,124.0
2002	$ 8,122.0	$ 7,581.5	$ 7,569.6
2003	$ 8,080.0	$ 8,282.8	$ 7,885.1
2004	$ 9,018.0	$ 8,530.0	$ 8,313.2
2005	$ 9,442.0	$ 8,878.0	$ 8,732.5
2006	$ 10,240.0	$ 9,403.0	$ 9,108.6
2007	$ 10,350.0	$ 9,496.0	$ 9,294.0
Total	$ 69,715.0	$ 66,011.3	$ 64,599.0

Thank You, Representatives Jones and Pomeroy

I want to thank Representatives Jones and Pomeroy for their intemperate outbursts at yesterday's Social Security Subcommittee hearing. In a narrow sense, their remarks were unfair to the current Commissioner of Social Security and their criticisms were misplaced, but in a larger sense hitting the Commissioner with a verbal two by four was exactly the right thing to do.

Their remarks were unfair to Commissioner Astrue because he had just started on his job two days earlier. He can hardly be blamed for any mess at Social Security. It is a wonder that he was willing to show up for any Congressional hearing when he may not have even finished filling out his W-4.

The criticisms were also misplaced. Jones and Tubbs were focusing upon the narrow issue of why the Office of Personnel Management has still not produced a new register from which Social Security could hire Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) after having worked on the problem for ten years. This is absurd and unbelievable, but the sad fact is that even if OPM had produced a new register eight years ago, things would be little different at Social Security today. The problem is that there has not been enough money in the budget to hire as many ALJs as have been needed. Social Security has been able to hire the limited number of ALJs they could afford off the old register, making a new register less urgent than it might seem at first blush. Of course, Social Security may have told Jones and Tubbs and others in Congress that the problem was OPM instead of the budget or, at least, implied this. Anyone responsible for such a deception should be ashamed.

In a larger sense, there was an urgent need for the Social Security Subcommittee to demonstrate to upper management at Social Security that there is a new sheriff in town and things are going to change. Social Security needs to understand that frankness about the agency's service delivery problems is essential. There can be no more happy talk that minimizes the current problems while promising that some grand plan to be implemented in the future will solve all of Social Security's problems. That is no longer an option. Upper management must realize that Social Security's staffing situation is dire and urgent action is essential. Solutions that were unthinkable last October because they could be criticized as "paying down the backlog" should be urgent necessities today.

Biggs Nomination Rejected

President Bush had nominated Andrew Biggs to become the Deputy Commissioner of Social Security. The New York Times reports that Senator Max Baucus, the Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, has announced that his Committee will not hold a hearing on Biggs' nomination, nor consider it in any way. Biggs is currently the Associate Commissioner for Retirement Policy at Social Security, a position that was probably created just for him. Biggs is a huge proponent of privatizing Social Security.

Social Security Subcommittee Members Don't Want To Hear Any More "Crap" And "Lies"; Call Delays In Hiring ALJs A "God-Damned Outrage" And "Insanity"

The heated nature of the Social Security Subcommittee hearing today on disability backlogs should be making it clear to the Commissioner of Social Security that he will have to do something about those backlogs or Subcommittee members will make his life very difficult.

Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jones of Ohio pressed Commissioner Astrue on why Social Security had not hired more ALJs and demanded to ask questions about this of Deputy Commissioner Linda McMahon, who was along but not scheduled to testify. McMahon said she has been told that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is nearly done with a new register from which ALJs could be hired -- after a ten year delay. Jones made no effort to hide her anger about the situation and said at one point that she did not want to hear any more "crap" about regulations and (OPM) holding up getting more ALJs.

Representative Pomeroy of North Dakota said that he thought he had been "lied" to by former Commissioner Barnhart and others about the problems in hiring more ALJs. He said that he wants a Subcommittee hearing with the Director of the Office of Personnel Management and former Commissioner Barnhart as well as the current Commissioner testifying so that he could get to the bottom of why more ALJs have not been hired. Representative Pomeroy talked about the incompetence of OPM and called it a "god-damned outrage."

If anything, my summary understates just how angry Jones and Pomeroy were. I would not want to be the director of OPM if there is another hearing on the ALJ register issue -- and there probably will be.

Even the ranking Republican member, Sam Johnson of Texas, referred to the OPM situation as insanity.

I hope someone can post this hearing on You Tube.

Streaming Video Now Available

I am now able to access the live House Ways and Means Subcommittee hearing streaming video, although not without some problems, especially in video. I would be interested in finding out how to access a recording of this hearing. Please e-mail me at charles[at]charleshallfirm.com.

I have heard Commissioner Astrue say that Social Security would not be rolling out Disability Service Improvement (DSI) in one or two regions per year over the next few years.

One thing to remember in watching this is that the House Ways and Means Committee cannot appropriate one cent to the Social Security Administration. The Budget and Appropriations Committees control the money.

Witness Statements For House Social Security Subcommittee Hearing

The House Social Security Subcommittee is holding a hearing today on Social Security disability backlogs. The hearing may be available streaming live over the internet, but the techology does not seem to be working for me at the moment. Below are links to the witness statements, with the statements from Schieber and Warsinskey seeming to me to be of the most immediate interest:

Witnesses

	Panel:
	The Honorable Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner, Social Security Administration
	Panel:
	Sylvester J. Schieber, Chairman, Social Security Advisory Board
	Nancy Shor, Executive Director, National Organization of Social Security Claimants’ Representatives, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey
	Rick Warsinskey, President, National Council of Social Security Management Associations, Inc., Cleveland, Ohio
	James Fell, President, Federal Managers Association Chapter 275, Alexandria, Virginia

Institute Of Medicine Strikes Out

The Institute of Medicine of the National Academies has issued a report entitled "Improving the Social Security Disability Decision Process", which is available for the bargain price of $36.90. Before you buy it, you may want to read all the way to the end of their blurb on the study:

The Social Security Administration (SSA) uses a time saving screening tool called the Listing of Impairments (Listings) to identify individuals who meet the Social Security definition of disability, but it is concerned with a substantial drop in the percentage of claims granted disability benefits based on the Listings over the past 25 years.

At the request of the SSA, the Institute of Medicine formed a committee which issued the report; Improving the Social Security Disability Decision Process, addressing the medical aspects of disability determination and recommending improvements. The committee recommended the SSA:

• Investigate the reliability and validity of the Listings as a tool for identifying the truly disabled;
• Incorporate condition-specific functional assessment tools in the Listings that demonstrate a strong correlation with work disability;
• Strengthen the process for revising and updating the Listings;
• Expand medical and functional expertise at the staff level; and,
• Establish an external advisory committee system

The committee concluded that a better mechanism than the Listings does not exist at this time, although it recommends that SSA monitor and support promising alternative approaches to disability assessment.

One day I would like to read a report from one of these beltway bandits that says "There is no solution to the problem, so quit wasting your money on consultants." Instead we always get studies that advise things like setting up "an external advisory committee system" or "support promising alternative approaches", with the authors of the study being ready, willing and able -- for a hefty price -- to set up and man these external advisory committees and explore the "promising alternative approaches."

From The Weird Fringe

This has only a tenuous relation to the topic of Social Security News, but you ought to see the article about Social Security on The Fatherland Security State. I do not even know what this person's point is.