Fee Payments In June

Social Security has released its June statistics on payments of fees to attorneys and others for representing Social Security claimants. As I have indicated before, this is a useful guide to how good or bad a job Social Security is doing in computing and paying back benefits to claimants after a favorable decision.

Fee Payments
Month/Year	Volume	Amount
Jan-07	15,331	$55,149,991.81
Feb-07	19,301	$69,731,683.72
Mar-07	26,505	$94,396,916.02
Apr-07	26,889	$96,650,134.82
May-07	24,429	$86,625,391.60
June-07	27,716	$99,357,038.71
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).

Sokolove Advertising Nationally For Social Security Clients

The Law Offices of James Sokolove has advertised on television nationally for several types of cases for years. I have recently heard that they are now advertising nationally for Social Security disability clients. Their website reflects this. I am uncertain how they work, but my guess is that they work through affiliated law firms.

Binder and Binder is also advertising nationally, although it is my understanding that they generally represent the clients themselves. Are there any other law firms -- or other entities for that matter -- advertising nationally for Social Security business? Yes, I know there are plenty of law firms, including my own, which advertise locally, but national advertising for Social Security clients is a very different matter.

Happy Independence Day!

Results Of Last Week's Unscientific Polls

Two attorneys in private practice aided by the Association of ALJs has sued over the short time available to apply to become an ALJ. Do you think that it would be a good thing if the lawsuit is successful?

Yes (39)	32%
No (76)	63%
Don't know/No opinion (5)	4%

Total Votes: 120

The Association of ALJs is suing over a new requirement that all ALJs retain active bar membership. Do you think it would be a good thing if they win this lawsuit?

Yes (28)	22%
No (96)	74%
Don't Know/No opinion (5)	4%

Total Votes: 129

A Social Security Check From 1956

From the Mansfield Ohio News-Journal:

Joann Crawford barely remembers her father, who died when she was 4.

While going through some of the family's belongings, she found a social security check that belonged to her father, Charles.

The check was dated June 3, 1956, in the amount of $98.50.

"This check is like validating his existence, because he died when I was so young" she said. "It was really shocking to find it."

When she took the check to the social security office, Crawford said, some of the workers commented it was older than they were and reveled in the authenticity of the antique.

It was also a shock when they told her the check could be redeemed by filling out a claim form for a deceased beneficiary.

"I haven't thought about spending it," Crawford said, adding that social security department told her it will take three months to process the check. "I don't know what to do with it. I don't know if it's worth cashing."

Number Of Employees At Social Security -- Or Would The Last One Out Please Turn Out The Lights

The Office of Personnel Management has just released numbers on the number of employees at the Social Security Administration as of March 2007. Here are the numbers with some comparison points:

• March 2007 61,867
• December 2006 63,410
• September 2006 63,647
• June 2006 64,814
• March 2006 64,297
• March 2005 66,312

The Social Security Administration lost 7% of its workforce in two years-- just at the point at which the agency was beginning to experience a surge in disability claims caused by the aging of the baby boomer generation as well as a dramatic increase in its Medicare responsibilities. Why would anyone be surprised that the service that Social Security gives the public has gone to hell? Why was Jo Anne Barnhart, who was Commissioner of Social Security until early this year, not making an issue of this? Why is Michael Astrue, the current Commissioner, not making more of an issue of it?

Obey Asks For Budget Support

From the Capitol Insider put out by the Disability Policy Collaboration:

The House Appropriations Chairman, Congressman David Obey (D-WI), met with human services advocates to enlist support for the House appropriations bill for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services and Education [which includes Social Security]. Telling advocates “Eleven years of neglect can’t be undone in one year,” Obey said that compromises in the bill were made in order to try to get the bipartisan votes to pass the bill and override a potential Presidential veto. He asked that the human services community support the bill “as-is,” recognizing that while increased funding is proposed for hundreds of programs, many programs will still not even be restored to their FY 2004 funding levels.

Interesting SSN Change

From today's Federal Register:

SSA is proposing to change the way that we assign SSNs. We intend to eliminate the geographical significance of the first three digits of the SSN (the ``area number'') by no longer allocating entire area numbers for assignment to individuals in specific States. Instead, the SSN will be randomly assigned from the remaining pool of available SSNs, and the first three digits of the SSN will no longer have any geographical significance. We believe that by changing the way we assign the SSN we will ensure that there will be a reliable supply of SSNs for years to come. Additionally, we believe that this will also help reduce opportunities for identity theft and SSN fraud and misuse.

A couple of questions come to mind. Why does Social Security need to publish something in the Federal Register about this? Issuing Social Security numbers on a geographic basis was never required by regulation. It was merely a matter of administrative convenience in the days before widespread computerization. Second, how does this help prevent identity theft? Anyone who knows the system can tell from my Social Security number that I was living in a certain part of North Carolina when I received my Social Security number. So what? How would that knowledge help someone in a criminal enterprise?

It seems to me that there may be more practical reasons behind this. A computer system that has to assign Social Security numbers both geographically and randomly is more complicated than one which assigns Social Security numbers merely randomly across the entire country.

This may sound silly, but I am already nostalgic for geographically assigned Social Security numbers.