Slow Start For Senior Attorney Program

On August 9 Social Security adopted regulations allowing its senior attorneys to issue fully favorable decisions. I have not yet seen any staff instructions on the senior attorney program nor any sign that the program is being implemented anywhere. Creating the instructions should be a snap. Merely dust off the old instructions, make a few changes and you have what you need. There ought to be some training, but the process is not that difficult. Why should it take so long to get going?

I can think of one possible explanation why things seem not to be moving. If attorney time is diverted to doing the senior attorney decisions, there will be less attorney time that can be devoted to writing decisions for Administrative Law Judges, creating a backlog there. In other words, the senior attorney program may not amount to much until more attorneys are hired and trained, because otherwise the agency is just borrowing from Peter to pay Paul and will get little if any boost in productivity.

Senate Finance Committee Schedules Hearing

The Senate Finance Committee has scheduled a hearing for September 20 at 10:00 a.m. on the subject "Frozen Out: A Review of Bank Treatment of Social Security Benefits. Witnesses will be named later.

The Last To Admit Defeat

From U.S. News and World Report:

President Bush's main architect charged with reforming Social Security [Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson] today sounded resigned to moving forward on small changes both Republicans and Democrats can agree on instead of the massive program once envisioned by the White House. ...

"I'm not naive; I'm not going to tilt at windmills," he says, explaining why he isn't pushing for a new debate on massive, Bush-styled reform. Paulson described himself as a lonely soldier in the effort to battle for Social Security reform, one of the major issues he came to Washington to work on. He said that he has been encouraging ideas from all sides, but so far, "I've been playing solitaire."

Social Security Employment Level

The numbers are in from the Office of Personnel Management for the number of employees at Social Security as of June 2007. Here is the number and how it compares with other dates.

June 2007 62,530
March 2007 61,867
December 2006 63,410
September 2006 63,647
September 2005 66,147
September 2004 65,258
September 2003 64,903
September 2002 64,648
September 2001 65,377
September 2000 64,521
September 1999 63,957
September 1998 65,629

No Revolving Door At Social Security

About a month ago I posted on this blog a notice about an opening at my law firm for an attorney to practice Social Security law, particularly to handle cases going to the Appeals Council and federal court. Given the number of Social Security employees who read this blog, it seems clear to me that a few hundred lawyers employed by the Social Security Administration read the help wanted ad or heard about it from someone who did, but not a single current Social Security employee has applied for the job.

I can think of many reasons why an attorney employed by Social Security would not apply: not interested in moving, not interested in private practice, hoping to get an ALJ job, not interested in a job writing briefs, loves current job, etc. Of course, the Social Security Administration does not exist to train attorneys to work in private practice. The agency can take pride in retaining its skilled workforce. Still, it seems surprising that not a single current Social Security employee has applied, even at a time when some idiots are harshly and unfairly taunting Social Security attorneys by calling them "scriveners" or referring to them as "the dregs of the legal profession," largely because many have never made a court appearance. I do not agree in any way with this criticism. Social Security's attorneys have challenging jobs. There are many ways to be a lawyer and working for the Social Security Administration is one of them. I have hired former Social Security employees in the past and may do so in the future.

There was a time in the late 1970s and early 1980s when there was a slow but steady stream of attorneys leaving Social Security for private practice. That is what I did in 1979. That stream has nearly dried up. Not only are Social Security's attorneys not applying for my job, but it seem that almost none of them are applying for other jobs or considering hanging out a shingle.

I have worked for both state and federal government. I live in a state capitol where the dominant employer is state government. I have observed government employees closely for decades. My best answer for why almost no Social Security attorneys are looking at private practice is that government service is particularly attractive to people who value job stability over just about everything else. Private practice involves working for a small entity that cannot offer anything like the job stability of federal service and that makes private practice out of the question for most Social Security attorneys, even though law firms often offer higher salaries, better working conditions and a job that does involve representation of clients, which is the paradigm for the practice of law.

Can anyone give a better explanation?

One Account Of Social Security Disability Claim

Medical News Today is carrying an article written by a person who just received a favorable decision from a Social Security Administrative Law Judge. Is he happy? Not really. Of course, he made his situation worse by being so proud that he waited several years after becoming disabled before applying for benefits, but read it yourself. It is an all too common story.

Mental Illness And Disability

From a press release from the National Institutes of Mental Health:

Mental disorders rank among the top ten illnesses causing disability—more than 37 percent worldwide—with depression being the leading cause of disability among people ages 15 and older, according to the Global Burden of Disease and Risk Factors published in 2006. Yet, the world’s mental health care needs are largely going unmet, especially in less developed nations but also in high-income countries, according to results from a new survey of 17 countries conducted as part of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) World Mental Health Survey Initiative. The results of the initiative, partially funded by the National Institutes of Health’s National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), were published in The Lancet in September 2007. ...

Inadequate services were most commonly found in low-income countries, but even in some high-income countries, people received inadequate services. For example, in the United States, only 18 percent received minimally adequate services—much lower than any other high-income country.

An Image From 1959