Modesto Opinion Piece On Backlog

From Mike Ervin writing in the Modesto, CA Bee:

We must stop the inexcusable delay in getting Social Security benefits to people with disabilities.

Hundreds of thousands of people who have filed legitimate disability claims with the Social Security Administration have been forced to wait, on average, an astonishing 520 days for a hearing on their claims. Many have waited as long as three years, losing their homes in the process.

New Parent To Child Deeming Proposed Rules

From today's Federal Register:

We propose to change the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) parent-to-child deeming rules so that we would no longer consider the income and resources of a stepparent when an eligible child resides in the household with a stepparent, but that child’s natural or adoptive parent has permanently left the household. These proposed rules would respond to a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Social Security Acquiescence Ruling (AR) 99– 1(2) currently applies the Court’s decision to individuals who reside in Connecticut, New York, and Vermont. These rules propose to establish a uniform national policy with respect to this issue. Also, we propose to make uniform the age at which we consider someone to be a ‘‘child’’ in SSI program regulations and to make other minor clarifications to our rules.

Congressional Quarterly On Social Security Issues

From Congressional Quarterly:

House Democratic leaders Thursday warned the Social Security Administration not to implement a proposed regulation they fear might increase the backlog of disability claims and unfairly deny benefits to deserving applicants. ...

“What if you’re having chemotherapy the day of the hearing, and you didn’t know that in advance?” a Ways and Means aide said. “It’s full of stuff like that. I just don’t see how beneficiaries could navigate this, and the actuary agrees — he says this is going to reduce benefits.”

The new rule, Shor said, is “really designed to discourage a claimant — particularly an unrepresented claimant — from appealing a denial of benefits.” About a third of those who appeal do not hire lawyers, she said. ...

Meanwhile, Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus , D-Mont., wrote Jim Nussle, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, urging him to include more money for administrative expenses in President Bush’s fiscal 2009 budget for Social Security. ...

Congressional Opposition To Procedural Changes

Below is a press release from the House Ways and Means Committee. Make sure to read both letters linked in this press release. The letter from Social Security's chief actuary says that the real estimate of the effect of the proposed regulations is not $1.5 billion over 10 years, but over $2 billion. Is Michael Astrue bold enough to try to buck this much pressure?

WASHINGTON, DC – The Social Security Administration is proposing to sharply restrict appeal rights for severely disabled individuals applying for Social Security, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Medicare and Medicaid benefits.

If the proposed regulation is adopted, severely disabled persons will be denied access to over $2.0 billion in benefits over the next ten years – not because they do not meet the eligibility criteria in the law, but because they could not successfully navigate the complex new procedural requirements established by the proposed rule.

Nearly two decades ago, the Social Security Administration attempted to put forth a similar rule restricting appeal rights and instituting new procedural complexities. It was quickly abandoned in the face of public outcry.

Today, a letter objecting to the regulation was filed by eleven House Committee and Subcommittee chairs, including the chairs of the Committee on Ways and Means, the Committee on Energy and Commerce, the Committee on the Judiciary, and the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Please click here to read the letter. Please click here to read the proposed regulation.

Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel:
"It would be grossly unfair to deny critical benefits to severely disabled people simply because they lack the sophistication and legal expertise to navigate the complex new appeals rules and limitations the Social Security Administration is proposing," said Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles B. Rangel (D-NY). "No one should lose out on an appeal because of procedural technicalities. The Committee on Ways and Means intends to further investigate the impact of this regulation on people with disabilities early in the next session of Congress."

Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell:
“We should be making it easier, not more difficult, for disabled individuals to access the benefits they need,” said Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John D. Dingell (D-MI). “The proposed rule would create cumbersome and unnecessary obstacles for those seeking an appeal. The most vulnerable among us deserve better, and my Committee will be working to ensure that this regulation does not become a roadblock for disabled individuals seeking health care and support services.”

Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers:
"We must ensure that the hearing and appeals process for disabled persons seeking Medicare and Medicaid benefits is fair and equitable," said House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI). "By proposing a rule that would essentially reduce access to benefits, the Social Security Administration is ignoring the real reason for the administrative backlog they now face, which is the severe and chronic underfunding of the agency."

Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Henry Waxman:
“We have a critical problem of a backlog in the hearings and appeals process at the Social Security Administration,” said Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Henry A. Waxman (D-CA). “That backlog effectively denies benefits and rights to disabled persons. But Social Security is moving in the wrong direction with these proposals. Cutting claimants’ rights, and adding procedural barriers, will only compound the damage. Mere administrative efficiency can’t trump the obligation of SSA to fully and fairly consider the claims.”

Press Release On National Hearing Office

A press release from Social Security:

Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security, today announced that the agency’s National Hearing Center (NHC) is open for business. The NHC is one of the many steps the agency has taken this year to address the backlog of disability cases at the hearing level. Chief Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Frank Cristaudo presided over the first hearing from the NHC in Falls Church, Virginia using electronic video technology. The claimant and the claimant’s representative took part in the hearing from a hearing office in Cleveland, Ohio.

“The National Hearing Center allows us to capitalize on new technologies such as electronic disability folders and video teleconferencing,” Commissioner Astrue said. “The Center will give us needed flexibility to address the country’s worst backlogs.”

At present, the agency has allotted seven ALJs to the NHC. The NHC ALJs will initially hear cases for the Atlanta, Cleveland and Detroit hearing offices -- areas of the country where the wait for a hearing can be two years or more. Additional ALJs may be added over time to provide the NHC with the capability to assist more offices.

Social Security’s backlog of disability cases is well documented. Currently, there are about 750,000 cases awaiting a hearing -- a number that has more than doubled in this decade. In May 2007, Commissioner Astrue presented Congress with a four part plan to address the backlog. His testimony is available at www.socialsecurity.gov/legislation/testimony_052307.htm.

“When it comes to addressing the disability backlog, there is no single magic bullet,” Astrue said. “The National Hearing Center is another important step we can take to provide the American public with the service they deserve.”

Issuing a press release on something as minor as this is a sign of just how desperate Commissioner Astrue is to demonstrate that he is trying to do something about the backlogs.

Some More Budget Help

An e-mail from the National Organization of Social Security Claimants Representatives (NOSSCR) alerts me to something I missed in the budget bill that just passed Congress -- something that is not there. The section of the budget that ordered the Social Security Administration to spend $477 million on continuing disability reviews and SSI re-determinations has been removed. This may free up a good deal of money to be spent on more urgent matters, if and this may be a big if, Commissioner Astrue decides to do so. Astrue could still choose to spend the money on continuing disability reviews and SSI re-determinations.

Update: I have received conflicting information to the effect that the budget bill does not free up the entire $477 million previously earmarked for continuing disability reviews and SSI re-determinations, but only $213 million, with the rest still required. You need a pickax and shovel to delve into this enormous budget bill.

SSA Duped

From The Red Tape Chronicles at MSNBC:

Ten suspects were indicted last week in Seattle for allegedly impersonating consumers and obtaining their bank records, tax returns and Social Security earnings statements.

According to the indictment, the Internal Revenue Service and the Social Security Administration were repeatedly tricked into coughing up very sensitive documents. ...

In all, 12,000 consumers were victimized by the defendants from 2004-2007, the indictment alleges.

At the center of the crime, according to the indictment, were a Emilio and Brandy Torrella, a Seattle couple, and their employee, Steven Berwick. Operating as BNT Investigations in Belfair, Wash., the three allegedly took orders from private investigators around the country and filled them by impersonating the targeted consumers. The other investigators then resold the information.

Appeals Council Backlogs

Below is the complete text of an e-mail I received today from a staff member in my office who had just talked with an employee at the Appeals Council of the Social Security Administration:

Told me w/ the backlog they are just finishing up 2005 and starting on 2006, but they are mixing in some 2007.

Undoubtedly, the "mixing in some 2007" is an effort to artificially make their stats look better by "fast-tracking" a few easy cases. It makes the averages look a bit better, while making the wait times worse for the people waiting two years and more for review. What is the plan for working off the backlogs at the Appeals Council. The last I heard the Appeals Council was expected to lose a good deal of staff over the next year.